Form No. HCJD/C-121
ORDER SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Crl.Misc.No.14282-BC of 2016
ZAFAR ALI SHAH ADVOCATE.
Versus
ZAKIR HUSSAIN & ANOTHER.
S.No.of order / Proceeding
Date of
Order/
Proceeding
Order with signature of Judge, and that of parties’ counsel, where necessary
27.03.2017
Petitioner in person.
Rana Muhammad Shafique, Deputy District Public Prosecutor with Abdul Karim, A.S.I.
Mr. Azam Nazeer Tarrar, Advocate/Amicus Curiae.
Ms. Iffat Rasool Khan Ch., Advocate for respondent No.1 with respondent.
The petitioner namely Zafar Ali Shah, who is an Advocate by profession, through instant petition under Section 497 (5) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter referred as “Cr.P.C”), seeks cancellation of bail allowed to the respondent No.1 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chunian by way of order dated 10th September, 2016.
2. Precisely, the facts necessary for adjudication of instant petition are that respondent No.1 was apprehended by the police on the basis of suspicion and allegedly from his possession, 1220 grams Charas was recovered which resulted into registration of case FIR No.280 dated 09.08.2016 offence under Section 9(c) of The Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 (hereinafter referred as “CNSA, 1997”), at Police Station Sadar Chunian, District Kasur.
Crl.Misc.No.14282-BC of 2016
2
3. The respondent after his arrest, moved an application for grant of post-arrest bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chunian which was allowed vide order dated 10th September, 2016.
4. Vide order dated 20th October, 2016, while issuing notice to the respondents, a question as to maintainability of the instant petition and locus standi of the petitioner was framed. In order to resolve the said legal question, we had appointed Mr. Azam Nazeer Tarrar, Advocate as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court qua maintainability of this petition and scope of Section 497 (5) of “Cr.P.C”.
5. In support of his petition, the petitioner submitted that he brought this petition in pro bono publico capacity as impugned order has been passed in flagrant violation of law.
6. Mr. Azam Nazeer Tarrar, Advocate/Amicus Curiae while referring Section 497 (5) of “Cr.P.C” submitted that powers under the said provision of law are akin to the revisional powers. He, however, added that allowing a private individual to move such application will open a Pandora Box. He added that a private individual does not figure anywhere in the scheme of law and allowing a private entity to assume the role of prosecutor will offend the relevant provisions contained in “Cr.P.C”.
7. On the other hand, learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor while adopting the arguments advanced by the learned Amicus Curiae submitted that authority conferred on a Prosecutor cannot be delegated to a private individual.
Crl.Misc.No.14282-BC of 2016
8. After having heard the respective contentions, we have also gone through the relevant provisions dealing with the subject.
9. While examining the scope of Section 497 (5) of “Cr.P.C”, it would be advantageous to first go through the said provision which reads as under:-
“A High Court or Court of Session and, in the case of a person released by itself, any other Court may cause any person who has been 2017LHC1151 Cancellation of Bail
Cancellation of Bail Under Judgment 2017-LHC-1151 Free Download
