| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 2291 2014 SLD 2291 2014 YLR 663 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Bail Application No. 376-M of 2013, decided on 29th August, 2013
MUHAMMAD DAUD KHAN, J
Abdul Jalal and Saeed Ahmed for Petitioner. Haleem Khan for the Complainant. Muhammad Javid A.A.G. for the State
Criminal Bail Application No. 376-M of 2013, decided on 29th August, 2013
MUHAMMAD DAUD KHAN, J
Abdul Jalal and Saeed Ahmed for Petitioner. Haleem Khan for the Complainant. Muhammad Javid A.A.G. for the State
Mst. MUHMADIA
VS
The STATE through A.A.G. and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.496-A & 496-B---Enticing, or taking away, or detaining with criminal intent a woman, fornication---Bail, grant of---Case was one of moral turpitude and conduct of accused was undesirable for the society, especially in the area of Pakhtunkhwa culture, where Injunctions of Religion were strictly followed---Statement of accused under S.164, Cr.P.C., the proceedings under S.156(3), Cr.P.C., medical report, recoveries of Cellular Phones, and statements of independent witnesses, suggested reasonable ground for the accusation---Section 496-A, P.P.C. however, being not applicable to the case of accused, and S.496-B, P.P.C. was bailable offence, accused, in circumstances, was entitled for the grant of bail---Accused was directed to be released on bail. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 497, 498 & 499---Bail, grant of---Sureties, type of---Duty of Court---Court accepting the bail application of an accused, was to prescribe conditions about the type of sureties, and the satisfaction of the officer accepting the surety bond---Even a routine bail order would contain certain conditions between the lines---Such imposition of condition, was not an illegality, but it was a practice and a requirement of the administration of justice---If an accused was unable to furnish the sureties of the type required by the court, he could presume that his request for grant of bail had been declined---Court could not pass bail orders mechanically, but it had to take into stock the status of the sureties, their availability in case, their presence was needed by the court, their capability of having access to accused; as well as the circumstances which provide a satisfaction to the court that the order would not be misused for the continuation of the illegality. Mst. Shehnaz Bibi v. The State 2005 MLD 922 rel. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD DAUD KHAN, J.--Mst. Muhmadia, the accused/petitioner is seeking bail in case F.I.R. No.275 dated 15-7-2013, Police Station Kalakot, registered under sections 496-A/496-B P.P.C., as the same was refused to her by the Courts below. 2. On 13-7-2013, the husband of…
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