Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 2510 2014 SLD 2510 2014 YLR 1044
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 551-M and Criminal Miscellaneous Bail C.A. No. 67-M of 2013, decided on 23rd December, 2013
MUHAMMAD DAUD KHAN, J
M. Saleem and Mardan-e-Said Hakim for Petitioners. Umar Zaman Khan and Fazal Ahmad for the Complainant. Khwaja Salah-ud-Din for the State

SHERAZ and anothers

VS

The STATE and another

Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 114 & 34---Qatl-e-amd, attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, abetment, common intention---Bail, refusal of---Accused persons had been directly charged in the F.I.R. with specific role of firing at the complainant party, as a result of which two brothers had lost their lives, while complainant and a passerby sustained injuries on their persons---No delay in lodging of the report---Occurrence had been witnessed by eye-witnesses---Story of prosecution was further supported by recoveries effected by the Investigating Officer from the place of occurrence and Medico-legal evidence---Tentative assessment of the material available on the file showed reasonable grounds to believe that accused persons were linked with the commission of offence---Accused were not entitled to the concession of bail, which was refused, in circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(5)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 114 & 34---Qatl-e-amd, attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, abetment, common intention---Bail, grant of---Co-accused who had been granted bail, was only charged for 'Lalkara', but nothing was on record in support thereof---Nothing was on record to suggest that accused had ever misused the concession of bail, or had tampered with the evidence during investigation---Impugned order had been passed strictly in accordance with law; and jurisdiction exercised by lower court was within its competence---Bail granting order was neither perverse, arbitrary or whimsical, and had been passed on sound reasons---Consideration for cancellation of bail were altogether different from those required for grant of bail---Once an accused was admitted to bail by a competent court, then extraordinary circumstances were required to interfere with the said order---Application for cancellation of bail, being without force, was dismissed. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD DAUD KHAN, J.---This single order shall also dispose of connected bail cancellation application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous Bail C.A. No.67-M of 2013, as the same arises from one and the same F.I.R. 2. Accused/petitioners Sheraz…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492