SHAHBAZ and another vs THE STATE
The petitioners filed an application for pre-arrest bail under sections 354, 34, and 337-A(ii) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 in respect of an FIR registered at Police Station Shera Kot, Lahore. The core legal question concerned the conduct of counsel in wilfully and dishonestly suppressing the fact that a previous bail application for the same accused had already been dismissed by the court a day earlier. The Lahore High Court dismissed the bail application on account of this concealment. The court held that suppressing material facts regarding prior dismissal of bail is a serious professional misconduct inconsistent with the traditions of the legal profession, and directed the Punjab Bar Council to take appropriate disciplinary action against the responsible advocate in light of precedent and statutory provisions.
- What is the legal consequence of wilfully suppressing the dismissal of a prior bail application when filing a subsequent petition?
- Can a pre-arrest bail application be dismissed solely on the ground of concealment of material facts regarding previous litigation?
- What role does the Bar Council play in taking disciplinary action against advocates for professional misconduct involving concealment of facts?
- Section 354, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.--- The petitioners filed this application for bail before arrest in F.I.R.
No,662 of 2005, dated 27-10-2005, under sections 354, 34, 337-A(ii), P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Shera Kot, Lahore.
2. It is very unfortunate that lawyers file bail applications and other petitions without disclosing that bail application of the same accused person already stands dismissed by the Court. This wilful and dishonest suppression of fact is on increase. This attitude is inconsistent with the tradition and name of this profession. Sadly, some members of the Bar are determined to pollute the good name of this profession. They are following the unethical practice recklessly without being afraid of any punishment, etc.
3. This is a high time that the Punjab Bar. Council should realize their moral and statutory duty to purge the community by taking an appropriate action against such members of the Bar. The petitioners filed Criminal Miscellaneous No,15/B of 2006, Abbas and others. v. The State which was dismissed vide order, dated 6-1-2006. Despite that, the A learned counsel filed present petition, Criminal Miscellaneous No,255/B of 2006 on the following day i,e, 7-1-2006, suppressing dismissal of earlier bail application on 6-1-2006. For the same reason, this bail application is dismissed.
4. The Vice-Chairman, Punjab Bar Council and Secretary Punjab Bar Council are directed to take appropriate action against Ch. Muhammad Ramzan, Advocate High Court/Sessions Court, Lahore, CC No,P.Lh.14758,* in the light of decision of the Honourable Supreme Court known as Zubair's case, PLD 1986 SC 173 and the Punjab Legal Practitioner and Bar Councils Act. The Secretary, Punjab Bar Council is also directed to place a report of action taken against the said counsel through the Registrar of this Court in six weeks. {{FOOT NOTE}} ' Punjab Bar Council has issued a clarification to the effect that "It is clarified that Ch. Muhammad Ramzan, Advocate High Court/Sessions Courts, Lahore, CCNo,.PLH.14758 is not Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry, Advocate, Supreme Court of Pakistan, Ex-Member and Vice-Chairman, Punjab Bar Council, now Member Pakistan Bar Council having Computer Code No,PLH.1479."