| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1975 SLG 946 1975 SLD 946 1975 PCRLJ 56 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Revision Application No. 167 of 1973, 26th September, 1973
ABDUL HAQEE KURESHI, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Revision Application No. 167 of 1973, 26th September, 1973
ABDUL HAQEE KURESHI, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Ali Muhammad
VS
The State
Law:
Section:
Keywords: Guarantee, Period, Magistrate, Appearance, Proceedings, Disposal, Care, Set Aside, Procedure, Qualifications, Petitioner, Responsibility, Legality, Conditions, Petition, Impugned Order, Surety, Order, Qualification, Defence Result: Application allowed JUDGMENT This revision application has been filed by one A.I Muhammad Mari and seeks to challenge an order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Khairpur dated 5th September 1973, asking the petitioner to furnish security in the sum of Rs. 5,000 and the qualifications for the surety were also set down in the said order which qualifications should be that the surety should take care about the good conduct of the petitioner until the disposal of the main proceedings under section 110, Cr. P. C. A revision was filed against such order before the Sessions Court, Khairpur Mirs but the same was dismissed. 2. On the 3rd September 1973, the petitioner was arrested by the Station House Officer of Tando Masti Khan within the District of Khairpur Mirs. He was produced before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate on 5th September, 1973 and the learned Magistrate passed an order under sec petition 112, Cr. P. C. By this order the petitioner was called upon to show cause why he should not be ordered to enter into a bond in the sum of Rs. 5,000 with two sureties each in the like amount for keeping good behaviour for a period of 12 months and the sureties were further encumbered with the responsibility of controlling the activities of the petitioner. On the same day a bail application entitled as one under section 496, Cr. P. C. Was made and the learned Magistrate passed the following order: "Heard defence counsel M/s. Ghous A.I Shah and Allah Bux Abbasi. Perused the report of S. H. O. Police Tando Masti Khan and the order under section 112, Cr. P. C. A surety executing a bond in terms of Form II, Sched. V, as in the present case, in fact undertakes thereby to guarantee the good conduct of his principal and his fitness to stand as surety must accordingly be judged from this stand-point also and not merely from the standpoint of his pecuniary fitness. I do not find this surety fit for the purpose of the bond and accordingly I reject…
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