Case Details

Citation(s)
1971 SLG 333 1971 SLD 333 1971 SCMR 637
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 50 of 1966, decision dated: 19th October 1966(On appeal from the order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 18th October 1965, in Criminal Revision No. 335 of 1965)
S. A. RAHMAN AND HAMOODUR RAHMAN, JJ

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

NAZIR--Appellant

VS

AMIR DIN AND another

Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 497 & 439-Cancel­lation of bail-Petition for cancellation of bail moved before Sessions Judge on ground that accused was threatening prosecution witnesses arid putting pressure on them not to depose against him dismissed-­High Court in revision against order of Sessions Judge relying on new materials and allegation of new threats cancelling bail-Held, High Court was acting in revision under S. 439 and not in exercise of its jurisdiction under S. 497(5) ; High Court, in circumstances, was not justified in by-passing order of Sessions Judge and cancelling bail on new grounds set out in revision petition-Proper course was to approach Sessions Court afresh for cancellation of bail on new grounds. Dr. Javid Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Mushtaq Ahmad, Attorney for Appellant. S. M. Birjees, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Sirjees Nagi, Attorney for Respondent No. 1. Saeedur Rahman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for the State. Date of hearing : 19th October 1966. JUDGMENT HAMOODUR RAHMAN, J.--This appeal, by special leave, is directed against an order of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of West Pakistan cancelling the bail granted to the appel­lant herein by the Sessions Judge of Lyallpur on the 18th of April 1964. The sole ground upon which the cancellation was made is that "one of the recovery witnesses, namely, Choto, made a report to the police that Nazir respondent was threatening him if he deposed against him". Leave was granted in this case to consider whether the dis­cretion to cancel bail had been exercised on correct principles and after a consideration of the relevant material on the record. The appellant herein was arrested by the police on the 24th of February 1964, in the course of investigation of a first informa­tion report lodged by the first named respondent herein on the 6th of February 1964, alleging that 7 persons armed -with weapons had burgled his house on the night between the 5th and the 6th of February 1964. In this report no culprits were named but it was said that the culprits could be identified if seen, although the houses of the present…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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