| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1928 2008 SLD 1928 2008 PLD 146 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petitions Nos.320 and 421 of 2008, decision dated: 31st March, 2009. (On appeal from the judgment/order dated 31-10-2008 passed by Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1209 of 2008)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., MIAN SHAKIRULLAH, JAN AND RAJA FAYYAZ AHMED, JJ
Muhammad Rashid Qamar, Advocate Supreme Court and Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate-on-Record (in both cases). Shahid Kamal Khan, Advocate Supreme Court No. 1 (Crl.P.No. 320 of 2008). M. Arif Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record No
Criminal Petitions Nos.320 and 421 of 2008, decision dated: 31st March, 2009. (On appeal from the judgment/order dated 31-10-2008 passed by Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1209 of 2008)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., MIAN SHAKIRULLAH, JAN AND RAJA FAYYAZ AHMED, JJ
Muhammad Rashid Qamar, Advocate Supreme Court and Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate-on-Record (in both cases). Shahid Kamal Khan, Advocate Supreme Court No. 1 (Crl.P.No. 320 of 2008). M. Arif Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record No
Criminal No 320 of 2008 MUHAMMAD ILYAS, CHIEF MANAGER/ATTORNEY, ALLIED BANK LTD.,
VS
SHAHID ULLAH and others Criminal No 421 of 2008 MUHAMMAD ILYAS, CHIEF MANAGER/ATTORNEY, ALLIED BANK LTD. Vs ARIF ALI and another
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 497(5)---Penal Code (XLV or 1860), S.409, 468 & 471---Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance (IX of 1984), Sched. & Ss.5(6) & 12---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Petition for cancellation of bail---Considerations for recalling the order granting bail---Accused along with his co-accused, prima facie were involved under Ss.409, 468 & 71, P.P.C. being scheduled offences of Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984---Sentences prescribed under Ss.409, 468 & 471 for the purposes of Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984 had been modified, which the High Court nor the lower court had taken note of---Material placed on record was sufficient to prima facie, hold that involvement of accused persons at the present stage under Ss.409, 468 & 471, P.P.C. could not be overruled---Section 6(7), Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984 provided that the accused, if at all released on hail, the amount of bail shall he Fired having regard to the gravity of the charge, against .sack person, and where the charge specified any amount in respect of which the offence was alleged to have been committed, shall not he less than the said amount---If order of granting bail was patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and had resulted in miscarriage of justice or if the court had come to the conclusion that same was perverse on the face of it, or had been passed in violation of law then the same could he recalled---In the present case, the prosecution had produced convincing evidence to hold that the accused were involved, prima facie, in the commission of the offence, where an amount of Rs.60 lac had been misappropriated by committing the criminal breach of trust by a Banker with the connivance of the co-accused and they also committed forgery for the purpose of cheating etc.---Accused, therefore, in terms of S.5(7) of the Offences in Respect of Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984 were not entitled for grant of' bail on furnishing surety bonds Supreme Court observed that it could have exercised its discretion to…
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