Get Law Help

Get Law Help Criminal, Civil, Banking, Labour, Service, ATC, Sepcial court's matters

PLD 1995 SC 34TARIQ BASHIR AND 5 OTHERS VS THE STATE, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed an appeal against the canc...
04/05/2026

PLD 1995 SC 34

TARIQ BASHIR AND 5 OTHERS VS THE STATE, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed an appeal against the cancellation of post-arrest bail for petitioners accused of dacoity under Section 17(3) of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.

The core issue was whether the High Court was justified in cancelling bail previously granted by another judge of the same court.

The Supreme Court laid down several key principles regarding bail:

Bail is a right in bailable offences and a concession in non-bailable offences.
For non-bailable offences punishable with less than ten years imprisonment, bail is the rule, and refusal is the exception, to be exercised only in extraordinary cases (e.g., likelihood of abscondence, tampering evidence, repeat offence, previous conviction).
Courts should liberally consider release on personal bonds for bailable, petty, and less serious non-bailable offences to prevent overcrowding and uphold the presumption of innocence, aligning with Section 32 of the Prisons Act, 1894.
For serious non-bailable offences (punishable with death, life imprisonment, or ten years imprisonment), courts must make a tentative assessment of evidence to determine if reasonable grounds exist to believe the accused committed the crime, without conducting a mini-trial.

Cancellation of bail requires "strong and exceptional grounds" because it deprives a person of liberty already granted.
The benefit of reasonable doubt regarding the accused's involvement or identity should extend even to the bail stage, acknowledging the hardship of unjustified incarceration.
In the specific case, the Supreme Court observed that two High Court judges reached contradictory conclusions on the same material. This conflicting opinion itself created a "reasonable doubt" regarding the petitioners' guilt, making it a case for "further inquiry" under Section 497(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Additionally, the initial bail was justifiable due to discrepancies in the FIR, such as the petitioners' names not being mentioned despite family relation, and the number of accused being exaggerated.

Consequently, the Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, and restored the petitioners' bail, subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds. The Court stressed that its observations were tentative and would not prejudice the trial proceedings.

2026 PLJ 70, Ghulam Akbar, the accused/appellant, was convicted under Section 354, PPC for assaulting his ex-wife, Rabia...
04/05/2026

2026 PLJ 70, Ghulam Akbar, the accused/appellant, was convicted under Section 354, PPC for assaulting his ex-wife, Rabia Ameer, and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment by the Additional Sessions Judge.

The appellant filed an appeal, which the High Court allowed, acquitting him of all charges. The Court found several doubts in the prosecution's case:

Delayed FIR: A 24-day delay in reporting the incident after the alleged occurrence.
Lack of Medical Evidence: No medico-legal examination was conducted or presented to corroborate the assault allegations.

Unreliable Ocular Account: The complainant admitted not naming witnesses in her initial complaint, and the sole eye-witness's testimony was found to be inconsistent and contradictory, suggesting he was not present at the scene.

Family Litigation: The existence of a bitter family dispute over the custody and visitation rights of minors between the appellant and the complainant, which was admitted by prosecution witnesses, suggested a motive for false implication.

Based on these reasons, the Court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt and extended the benefit of doubt to the appellant, leading to his acquittal.

04/05/2026

🚨 LAWYERS & CLIENTS IN MULTAN – SAVE YOUR TIME & AVOID MISTAKES!

Struggling with urgent legal typing or last-minute court documents?

I offer professional steno typing services with speed, accuracy, and proper court format — exactly as required in District Courts & High Court.

✅ Suits, Written Statements & Petitions
✅ Bail Applications & Misc. Applications
✅ Legal Notices, Affidavits & Agreements
✅ Urdu (InPage) + English (MS Word) Typing
⚡ Urgent Work Delivered Same Day

🎯 Special Offer:
Get priority service for urgent cases — no delays, no errors.

💼 Experienced in District Courts Multan
🔒 100% Confidential Work Guaranteed

📞 WhatsApp / Call Now: 0303-8198581
📍 Multan + Online Services Available

👉 Send your document now & get it done professionally — before your next hearing!

13/02/2024


سپرداری
Pro and Contra Grounds in Superdari
یہ کی سائل نے تمام اقساط اداکرکے موٹرسائیکل کو خریدا، جس کی رسید بھی حاصل کی۔
That motorcycle was purchased by him after paying full installments to the leasing company, which had issued a certificate in his favour; [2012-YLR-2718]
یہ کہ موٹرسائیکل سائل کے نام درج شدہ ہے ۔
That motorcycle was registered in his name; [2012-YLR-2718]
یہ کہ سائل کے نام درج شدہ مقدمہ کاتصفیہ کردیاگیاہے۔
That FIR against the accused was disposed of for the reason [2012-YLR-2718]
یہ کہ فریقین کےدرمیان تنازعہ دیوانی نوعیت کاہے؛
That dispute between the parties was of civil nature [2012-YLR-2718]
یہ کہ ٹرائل کورٹ نے برآمدگی کی جگہ کو چارج شیٹ میں حذف کردیاہے چنانچہ چارج شیٹ درست نہیں۔
That Trial Court omitted to specify the place of recovery in charge-sheet as such charge-sheet was defective; [2006-MLD-1546]
یہ کہ استغاثہ برآمدگی کی جگہ کی نشاندہی کرنے سے قاصرہے ؛
That prosecution failed to specify place of recovery in its evidence [2006-MLD-1546]
یہ کہ کیس پراپرٹی کو عدالت کے روبروپیش نہیں کیاگیاہے۔
That the case property was not produced before Trial Court; [2006-MLD-1546]
یہ کہ کیمیائی تجزیہ کی رپورٹ درست نہ ہے اور اسے اس کے خلاف استعمال نہیں کیاجاسکتاہے۔
That Chemical Examiner's report was vague and could not be used as an incriminating piece of evidence against accused. [2006-MLD-1546]
یہ کہ چرس کو تلف کرنے سے قبل اس کو نوٹس جاری نہیں کیاگیاہے۔
That notice was not issued to him before destruction of contraband Charas [2006-PCrLJ-316]
یہ کہ چرس کو مجسٹریٹ کے حکم نامہ سے تلف کیاگیاہے نہ کہ خصوصی جج کی طرف سے جاری کردہ ہدایت کے مطابق؛
That seized Charas was destroyed by the order of Magistrate and not on the direction of Special Judge [2006-PCrLJ-316]
یہ کہ سائل پولیس کے ساتھ تعاون نہیں کررہاہے اور ڈرائیورں کے نام اور پتے بتانےسے قاصرہے۔
That applicant did not co-operate with the police and had not supplied names and addresses of the drivers of the vehicles; [2008-MLD-1491]
یہ کہ سواری کیس پراپرٹی ہے؛
That vehicle was the case property; [2008-MLD-1491]
یہ کہ ملزمان رپوش ہیں؛
That accused persons were absconding [2008-MLD-1491]
یہ کہ سواری ایک انتہائی اہم شہادت ہے
That the vehicles were the material piece of evidence in the hands of the prosecution, [2008-MLD-1491]
یہ کہ اگر سواری کو ریلیز کردیاگیا تو استغاثہ کے مقدمہ کو نقصان ہوسکتاہے۔
That if vehicles were released, the prosecution's case would be hampered. [2008-MLD-1491]
یہ کہ سواری کو ڈرائیور کے حوالہ کیاگیاتھا، تاکہ وہ اسے نجی ٹیکسی کےطور پر چلاتا، جبکہ سواری کے غلط استعمال کو سائل ذمہ دارنہیں؛
That he had given the vehicle to his driver (accused) for running the same as a private taxi, therefore, it was no fault on part of the applicant if vehicle had been misused; [2012-MLD-1543]
یہ کہ سواری سائل کی کفالت کا واحد سہاراہے؛
That the vehicle was his only source of income, [2012-MLD-1543]
یہ کہ سواری تھانہ کے اندرکھلی جگہ پر کھڑی ہے اور اس کے کچھ پرزہ جات کو پولیس نے نکال لیاہے؛
That vehicle was lying in the police station and some of its parts had been removed by police officials. [2012-MLD-1543]
یہ کہ اس نے بینک سے قرضہ حاصل کرکے بس کو خریداتھا؛
That he had purchased the bus on lease from a bank on finance facility; [2013-YLR-1626]
یہ کہ اس نے اکثراقساط بینک کوواپس بھی کردیں ہیں؛
That he had paid 55 lease installments out of a total of 60; [2013-YLR-1626]
یہ کہ بس عوام الناس کی سواری کے طور پر استعمال ہوتی ہے؛
That the bus was being used for public transport and not for carriage of narcotics as recovery had not been made from any secret cavity but from a box underneath the driver's seat; [2013-YLR-1626]
یہ کہ بس کا ڈرائیور ذمہ دار ہے؛
That driver of bus was exclusively responsible for the illegal act; [2013-YLR-1626]
یہ کہ مالک بس میں موجود نہ تھا؛
That he (owner) was neither present in the bus nor could be tagged with the alleged recovery. [2013-YLR-1626]
یہ کہ بس تھانہ میں کھڑی دن بہ دن خراب ہورہی ہے۔
That bus was parked in the police station, where it was deteriorating day by day. [2013-YLR-1626]

18/10/2023

You can find me following the link below.

18/10/2023

کسی کو سنے بغیر اسکے خلاف آرڈر پاس کرنا آئین کی خلاف ورزی ہے

2021 PLC SC 221

18/10/2023

لوگوں کے فیملی تنازعات اور کسٹڈی کے معاملات میں پولیس مداخلت نہیں کر سکتی۔
2019 PCRLJ 909

16/10/2023

ای میل (Email) ای میل پرنٹ آؤٹ کی شکل میں دستاویز کے طور پر پیش کی جا سکتی ہے۔

2020 CLC 1029

13/10/2023

2023 SCMR 1635

زبانی اور دستاویزی ثبوت --- دستاویزی ثبوت زبانی ثبوت پر فوقیت رکھتے ہیں۔

13/10/2023

یہ دیوانی قانون کا ایک بنیادی اصول ہے، کہ پیش کردہ ایشوز کی حمایت میں شہادت کی ضرورت ہوتی ہے نہ کہ درخواستوں کی
(2004 CLC 1175)
2014 M L D 921

Address

Multan
60000

Telephone

+923038198581

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Get Law Help posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Get Law Help:

Shortcuts

Share

Category