Pakistan Case Law
1988 PCRLJ 1599

MUHAMMAD SALEEM Versus THE STATE

โญ Prefer in Google
Citation1988 PCRLJ 1599
CourtLahore High Court
Judge(s)Muhammad Rafiq Tarar

Muhammad Saleem petitioner stood surety in the sum of Rs.70,000 in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sargodha, for pearance of Zulfiqar son of Amir Khan, an accused in a murder case. He was admitted to bail for a week (7โ€‘6โ€‘1986 to 14โ€‘6โ€‘1986) on compassionate ground as he had to attend the funeral ceremony of his father who had been murdered. He was directed to surrender in Curt on 15โ€‘6โ€‘1986 but he did not appear. Consequently, a notice as issued to the petitioner and he was allowed eighteen opportunities for producing the accused but on 20th January, 1987 he expressed his inability to produce him. The learned Sessions Judge thereupon imposed a penalty of Rs.20,000 on him vide order, dated 20โ€‘1โ€‘1987.

The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order through this revision petition.

2. At the preliminary hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the impugned order only with regard to the quantum of penalty imposed and the petition was admitted to hearing to consider this question only.

3. Learned counsel submits that in the circumstances of the case the penalty imposed is' excessive as the petitioner had stood surety out of benevolence, arid not for any monetary gain.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that the order of the learned Sessions Judge is perfectly legal and since the petitioner could not produce the accused despite eighteen opportunities, therefore, no reduction is called for.

4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for' the parties. The learned State counsel is not in a position to controvert the contention that the petitioner had stood surety out of charitable considerations and not for any monetary gain. The penalty imposed by the learned Sessions Judge seems to be excessive. Keeping in view the principle that balance should be maintained between undue severity and undue leniency, I am, of the view that the fault of the petitioner will be adequately punished by requiring him to pay Rs.10,000 (ten thousand). Accordingly, the amount of penalty is reduced from Rs.20,000 to Rs.10,000. The petition stands disposed of accordingly.

M.Y.H./Mโ€‘660/L Bail granted.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.