LAHORE, July 19: A full bench of the Supreme Court on Monday rejected the bail application of a proclaimed offender, holding that a court fugitive lost certain legal concessions like bail.
The plea was made by Muhammad Raashed, of Shadbagh, who had allegedly abducted Saima (20) and her sister Shumaila (14) on Feb 25, 2002. However, assistant advocate-general Raja Abdur Rahman submitted before he bench, comprising Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Justice Javed Iqbal and Justice Falaksher, that Saima had stated before a magistrate that she was not abducted by any one. She left her house and married Raashed of her own free will.
As for the accused absconding from the trial court, the AAG submitted that he feared that he might be killed by some relatives of complainant Shama Bibi, the mother of the two girls.
Raashed was arrested after which the sessions court rejected his bail application. Upon an appeal, the Lahore High Court allowed him bail, but he later jumped over the bail by absenting himself from the proceedings at the trial court that later declared him a proclaimed offender.
When the LHC granted him bail, the complainant filed a petition with the Supreme Court requesting the cancellation of the bail. Later, he was arrested for being declared a PO along with some other accused, including Raashed (younger), who is said to have relations with Shumaila.
On the order of the apex court, Saima and Taj Bibi, another accused nominated by the complainant in the FIR, were arrested on July 12 this year. The court directed the AAG to produce the record of the trial court.
PETITION: The Lahore High Court on Monday turned a writ petition into a representation to the State Bank and the Agricultural Development Bank for consideration. The petition was filed by a farmer from Wan Bhachran, Mianwali district, Mohammad Shafi, who submitted that he, as a member of a cooperative society, had not benefited from the new loan policy of the ADBP as announced by the president.
His counsel, MD Tahir, submitted that the benefits of the new loan policy were not being extended to cooperative societies either, and their members were constrained to pay back loans according to the old policy.
