| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 931 2010 SLD 931 2010 PLJ 584 |
Lahore High Court
Crl. Misc. No. 85-CB of 2009, decided & hearing on 18.05.2009.
PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, JUSTICE
Mr. Muhammad Qasim Jameel, Advocate for Petitioner. Mian Bashir Ahmad Bhatti, DPG for State. Mr. Nadeem Ahmad Tarrar, Advocate for
Respondent.
Crl. Misc. No. 85-CB of 2009, decided & hearing on 18.05.2009.
PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, JUSTICE
Mr. Muhammad Qasim Jameel, Advocate for Petitioner. Mian Bashir Ahmad Bhatti, DPG for State. Mr. Nadeem Ahmad Tarrar, Advocate for
Respondent.
MUHAMMAD SALEEM KHAN
VS
STATE AND ANOTHER
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 497(5)--Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--Ss. 489-F--Cancellation of bail--Dishonoured of cheque was allowed post arrest bail by Sessions Judge--No doubt the person fugitive from law looses some of rights available to ordinary citizen but to Court's mind by itself cannot be a ground either to convict an accused in some offence or refusing bail--There was no complaint/apprehension of hampering prosecution evidence or misuse of concession of bail since the time he has been granted bail--Nothing was to be recovered from the accused/respondent nor he was required for investigation purpose--Petition dismissed. Bail-- ----Grounds for grant of post arrest and cancellation of bail are altogether different. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, JUSTICE---.--- Petitioner Muhammad Saleem Khan/complainant of case FIR No. 344/07 dated 4.11.2007 under Section 489-F PPC registered at Police Station Qutubpur seeks, cancellation of post arrest bail allowed to Respondent No. 2 vide order dated 20.12.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessinos Judge, Multan. The allegation against Respondent No. 2 as per FIR is that he issued cheque of Rs. 2,00,000/- in the name of the complainant, which was dishonoured upon the presentation before the concerned bank. 2. It is, inter-alia contended that Respondent No. 2 was declared proclaimed offender by the competent Court of law, which aspect of the matter was not taken note of while passing the impugned order; that respondent played hide and seek with the Courts of law. Even he moved the learned lower Court for grant of pre-arrest bail which was declined and thereafter, sought the same relief from this Court which was finally dismissed for non prosecution. Places reliance upon P.Cr.L.J. page 570 to canvass that fugitive from law are not entitled to the grant of bail; that since the learned Additional Sessions Judge declined pre-arrest bail on merits, therefore, the petitioner could not be allowed post arrest bail by the same learned counsel. Relies on 2005 P.Cr.L.J page 654 to canvass that the impugned order has been passed without applying judicious mind, arbitrarily besides no reasons…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492