MUSHTAQ And Others vs The STATE
The petitioners filed a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the High Court dated 23-9-1985, which had dismissed their application for bail. The Supreme Court of Pakistan reviewed the arguments presented by the petitioners' counsel and examined the impugned order of the High Court. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court had properly exercised its judicial discretion in refusing to grant bail to the petitioners. Upon consideration, the Supreme Court found that the petitioners failed to demonstrate any valid grounds to warrant interference with the judicial discretion exercised by the High Court. Consequently, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision and dismissed the petition for leave to appeal. The judgment reaffirms the principle that the Supreme Court will not interfere with the discretionary orders of the High Court regarding bail unless a compelling case for such interference is established by the petitioner.
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with the judicial discretion of the High Court in bail matters absent strong grounds?
- Is a petition for leave to appeal against a High Court order dismissing bail maintainable if no error in discretion is shown?
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, ACTG. C.J.--The petitioners seek leave to appeal against the order of the High Court, dated 23-9-1985, dismissing their bail application.
2. We have heard the petitioners' counsel and gone through the impugned order. No good ground has been made out for interference with the judicial discretion exercised by the High Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.