Case Details

Citation(s)
1970 SLG 3159 1970 SLD 3159 = 1970 PLD 470
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 1899 and 1911 of 1969, decided on 14th April 1969.
Presented By: Muhammad Haleem, J
Gahena v. The State P L D 1968 Lah. 1266 rel. Gul Muhammad v. The State P L D 1959 Pesh. 49 distinguished. Ch. Aziz Ahmad for Petitioners.

KHALID MAHMOOD AND ANOTHER---Petitioners

VERSUS

THE STATE---Respondent

Law:

Section:

  Provisional Constitution Order, 1969, Cl. 7(i) read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 1 (2) & 498---Bail---High Court's jurisdiction to grant bail by invoking S. 498 barred under Cl. 7 (i). Clause 7 (i) of the Provisional Constitution Order, which is to the following effect, also provides the bar where there is a conflict between a Martial Law Regulation and the ordinary law or where any law tends to prejudice the operation of any Martial Law Regulation made by the Chief Martial Law Administrator or by any person having authority from him to make Martial Law Regu lation: "Nothing in this Order or in any law shall prejudice the operation of any Martial Law Regulation made by the Chief Martial Law Administrator or by any person having authority from him to make Martial Law Regulations and where any Ordi nance made under Article 4, or any other law, is repugnant to such regulation, the regulation shall prevail". Thus, in view .of the' above it is absolutely clear that in the face of the above provision the High Court has no jurisdiction to grant bail by invoking section 498, Cr. P. C. Even otherwise there is a bar for the application of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of subsection (2) of section 1, Cr. P. C. The effect of this provision, was considered by a Division Bench of the Court in a case as reported in Gahena v. State P L D 1968 Lah. 1266. One of the points amongst others involved in that case was as the applicability of section 498, Cr. P. C. vis-a-vis the grant of bail to a person against whom proceedings were being taken under the West Pakistan Control of Goondas Ordinance, 1959. It was held in that case since a special procedure was prescribed in the Ordinance for proceeding against the person, the provisions of section 498, Cr. P. C. will not be applicable in view of subsection (2) of section 1, Cr. P. C. In view of the above state of law, the question of the application .of subsection (2) of section 5 or subsection (2) of section 29, Cr. P. C. cannot arise as the applicability of the provisions of the Code has been excluded. The question as to whether the High Court is not included within…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register