| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 2303 2012 SLD 2303 2012 YLR 103 |
Sindh High Court
Bail Application No. 500 of 2011, decided on 11th May, 2011. dates of hearing: 26th, 28th and 29th, April, 2011
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, J
Khawaja Naveed Ahmed and Junaid Farooqui for Applicants. Saleem Akhtar Buriro, A.P.G., along with S.H.O. Nayyar-ul-Haq, P.S. Anti-Encroachment Cell as well as Ghulam Farooq, Mukhtiarkar, Gulshan-e-Iqbal Town, Karachi for
Respondents
Bail Application No. 500 of 2011, decided on 11th May, 2011. dates of hearing: 26th, 28th and 29th, April, 2011
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, J
Khawaja Naveed Ahmed and Junaid Farooqui for Applicants. Saleem Akhtar Buriro, A.P.G., along with S.H.O. Nayyar-ul-Haq, P.S. Anti-Encroachment Cell as well as Ghulam Farooq, Mukhtiarkar, Gulshan-e-Iqbal Town, Karachi for
Respondents
AMANULLAH
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 497(2) & 561-A---Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act (XVIII of 2010), Ss.8 & 27---Encroachment---Bail application, rejection of---Jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Trial Court had dismissed bail application of accused and accused had filed bail application before High Court---State counsel had raised objection as to the maintainability of said bail application on the ground, of lack of jurisdiction of High Court---Validity---No prohibitory clause existed in Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act, 2010 which ousted the jurisdiction of the High Court; either for the purpose of grant of bail or otherwise---Under S.27 of Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act, 2010, an appeal before the High Court had been provided against the order passed by the Special Court---Bail application arising out of an order passed by the Special Court could be legally entertained by High Court for disposal on merits by treating the same under S.27 of the Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act, 2010, read with S.497, Cr.P.C.---By exercising inherent powers under S.561-A, Cr.P.C., the order of release could also be passed by the High Court to meet the ends of justice, more particularly, where there was no separate procedure provided for such purpose---Objection raised by State counsel, being misconceived, was rejected---Bail was granted. Khan Asfandyar Wali and others v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2001 SC 607; Saleem Hussain v. State PLJ 1996 Cr.C. (Lahore) 916; Imam Bux alias Mama alias Akhtar and another v. The State 2003 PCr.LJ 643 and Haji Ghulam Ali v. The State through A.G. N.W.F.P, Peshawar and another2003 SCMR 597 ref Haji Ghulam Ali v. The State through A.G. and N.-W.F.P. Peshawar and another 2003 SD 862; Khan Asfand Yar Wali v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2001 SC 607 and F. Brummel and 3 others v. The State PLD 1986 Kar. 390 rel. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Sindh Public Property (Removal of Encroachment) Act (XVIII of 2010), S.8---Encroachment---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Tentative assessment of available record showed that…
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