Successive Bail Petitions
📝 AI Summary — Plain-Language Overview
This is a Supreme Court of Pakistan order dealing with a bail matter that had been repeatedly filed and withdrawn before the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench.
The petitioner, Rizwan Ali, had filed successive bail applications before the High Court, but each time the application was withdrawn without the High Court actually examining the merits of his case for bail. When his most recent bail application was disposed of on 19 June 2013, he approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court had not properly applied the legal principles set out in earlier Supreme Court decisions (Muhammad Siddique v. The State and Amir Masih v. The State, 2013 SCMR 1059) regarding how such bail matters should be handled.
At the hearing, the petitioner's counsel, the state's prosecutor, and the complainant all agreed that the High Court had indeed failed to correctly apply these principles and had never actually considered the substance of Rizwan Ali's bail request- each prior withdrawal was simply a withdrawal, not a decision on merits.
Given this agreement among all parties, the Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, set aside the High Court's order, and sent the bail application back to the High Court. The High Court was directed to decide the bail application afresh, this time actually examining the merits of the petitioner's case, rather than allowing it to be withdrawn again without proper consideration.
یہ سپریم کورٹ آف پاکستان کا ایک حکم نامہ ہے جو ضمانت کے ایک ایسے معاملے سے متعلق ہے جسے لاہور ہائی کورٹ، ملتان بینچ کے سامنے بار بار دائر کیا گیا اور واپس لیا جاتا رہا۔
درخواست گزار، رضوان علی، نے ہائی کورٹ میں یکے بعد دیگرے ضمانت کی درخواستیں دائر کیں، لیکن ہر بار درخواست کو واپس لے لیا گیا بغیر اس کے کہ ہائی کورٹ نے حقیقت میں اس کے ضمانت کے کیس کی خوبیوں پر غور کیا ہو۔ جب اس کی تازہ ترین ضمانت کی درخواست 19 جون 2013 کو نمٹا دی گئی، تو اس نے سپریم کورٹ سے رجوع کیا اور یہ موقف اختیار کیا کہ ہائی کورٹ نے ایسے ضمانت کے معاملات سے نمٹنے کے طریقہ کار کے بارے میں سپریم کورٹ کے سابقہ فیصلوں (محمد صدیق بنام ریاست اور عامر مسیح بنام ریاست، 2013 ایس سی ایم آر 1059) میں طے شدہ قانونی اصولوں کا صحیح طور پر اطلاق نہیں کیا۔
سماعت کے دوران درخواست گزار کے وکیل، ریاست کے پراسیکیوٹر، اور شکایت کنندہ سب نے اس بات پر اتفاق کیا کہ ہ
Generated from the full judgment text below — not a substitute for reading the actual opinion.
PLJ 2013 SC 762 [Appellate Jurisdiction] Present: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa & Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry , JJ. RIZWAN ALI--Petitioner versus STATE etc.--Respondents Crl . Petition No. 658-L of 2013, heard on 16.7.2013 (Against the order dated 19.6.2013 of the Lahore High Court Multan Bench, Multan passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2084-B of 2013) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 497--Constitution of Pakistan , 1973, Art. 185(3)--Bail application was allowed to be withdrawn the withdrawal--Withdrawal bail simplicitor --Principle laid down reported in 2013 SCMR 1059 had not been correctly applied by High Court--Merits of case were not attended--Validity--Supreme Court found consensus between parties to be justified because the merits of petitioner's case for bail had never been attended to by in all successive applications filed by petitioners for the relief and every time such application was allowed to be withdrawn--The withdrawal so sought application and allowed was nothing but withdrawal simplicitor --Petition was allowed. [P. 763] A 2013 SCMR 1030, ref. Mr. Khadim Nadeem Malik , ASC and Mrs. Tasneem Amin , AOR for Petitioner. Complainant in Person. Mr. Mazhar Sher Awan , APG Punjab for State. Date of hearing: 16.7.2013. Order Asif Saeed Khan Khosa , J.--We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Prosecutor General, Punjab appearing for the State and Saleem Akhtar complainant in person and have gone through the record of this case with their assistance. It has been agreed between the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Prosecutor General, Punjab and the complainant appearing in person that the principle laid down by this Court in the case of Muhammad Siddique v. The State (Criminal Petition No. 896-L of 2012) and in the case of Amir Masih v. The State and another (2013 SCMR 1059) has not been correctly applied by the learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan to the facts of the present case vis -a- vis the present petitioner, namely Rizwan Ali. On the basis of such consensus all of them have requested that this petition may be converted into an appeal and the same may be allowed, the impugned order passed by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan on 19.6.2013 may be set aside and the matter of the petitioner's bail may be remanded to the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan for its decision afresh on the merits of the case. In the peculiar circumstances of the case we have found the consensus between the parties to be justified because the merits of the petitioner's case for bail had never been attended to by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan in the orders passed by (sic) in all the three successive applications filed by the petitioner for the said relief and every time such application was allowed to be withdrawn the withdrawal so sought and allowed was nothing but withdrawal simpliciter . This petition is, therefore, converted into an appeal and the same is allowed, the impugned order passed by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan on 19.6.2013 is set aside, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2084-B of 2013 shall be deemed to be pending before the said Court and the same shall be decided afresh after attending to the merits of the petitioner's case for bail. (R.A.) Petition allowed