Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497

P L D 1995 Karachi 137 Criminal Bail Applications Nos.262, 267 and 436 of 1994, decided on 11th December, 1994. Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--. ----S. 497---Bail---Delay--- Delay can be treated as a sufficient ground for granting bail if the same can be sufficient for quashing a criminal proceeding in a trial.--[Delay]. PLD 1974 SC 224; PLD 1975 Lah. 210; PLD 1968 SC 353; 1969 SCMR 362;1973 SCMR 212 and 1976 SCMR 413 ref. Interpretation of statutes--- ----' Retrospectivity of a statute--- Essentials--- Statute which impairs vested rights or the legality of past transaction or the obligation of contract should not prima facie be held to be retrospective with the result that enactment of such a statute is always presumed to be prospective in operation unless there is clear intention expressed by the Legislature in the enactment itself to give it retrospective effect or the matter in issue is a matter of procedure because an enactment regarding procedure can operate retrospectively. Code of Criminal Procedure (Sixth Amendment) Ordinance (XLI of 1993)--- ----Preamble---Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Ordinance (XIX of 1994), Preamble---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.89--- Repromulgation of Ordinance---Legality and sanctity---If the National Assembly was existing and there were no reasons to show for not placing an Ordinance for approval of the National Assembly, then legitimacy of such repromulgation of an Ordinance is doubtful---Sanctity of Code of Criminal Procedure (Sixth Amendment) Ordinance (XLI of 1993) and Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Ordinance (XIX of 1.994) re-promulgated on 10-11-1993 and 10-3-1994 respectively was, therefore, doubtful. Collector of Custom, Karachi v. Messrs New Electronic PLD 1994 SC 363rel.   Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-- ----S. 497(1), third and fourth provisios ---Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Ordinance (XIX of 1994) promulgated on 10-3-1994 had met its Constitutional death on 9-7-1994 and after that no such other, Ordinance had been re-enacted with the result that third and fourth provisos to S.497(1), Cr.P.C. had automatically come into force in their original form as they were prior…