Case Details

Citation(s)
2016 SLG 3640 2016 SLD 3640 2016 MLD 1619
Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench

QALANDAR ALI KHAN, JUSTICE
Qazi Muhammad Arshad for Appellant. Masood ur Rehman Tanoli for the State. Muhammad Naeem A.A.G. for the Complainant.

MST. NAGINA GUL ALI

VS

TARIQ AND OTHERS --Respondent

Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------- --------S. 497(5)----- --------- Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 & 109---Bail, cancellation of---Qatl-i-amd, abetment---Appreciation of evidence at bail stage --------- Principles---False implication---Enmity or family feud, relevance of---Medical report corroborating site plan---Circumstances connecting accused with offence --------- Record of evidence in absence of accused---Abscondance---Accused was alleged to have killed deceased while he was on his way with his security guard and driver---Trial court allowed bail on grounds including false implication on basis of previous enmity and security guard having not acted in response to attack on deceased---Validity---Trial court had not only overlooked prima facie aspect of present case, but had also accorded undue importance to, and embarked upon deep appreciation of conduct of security guard at time of occurrence---Security guard had explained his conduct at time of occurrence in his statement under S. 161 of Cr.P.C. followed by his statement under S. 164 of Cr.P.C.---Statement of security guard had also found support from statement of driver, other witness, recorded under S. 161 of Cr.P.C.---Security guard had explained as to how he had recognized accused at time of commission of offence---Overwhelming evidence was available on record to prima facie connect accused with offence---Such as direct charge of qatl-i-amd against accused in promptly lodged FIR by father of deceased---Was unlikely on part of father of deceased to substitute innocent person for real culprit---Strong motive of previous enmity existed but considering same as ground for false implication at bail stage would be farther from reality---Medical report supporting site-plan should have been good ground for holding accused prima facie connected with commission of offence---Disclosure of name of accused to driver by security guard was not so significant and fatal dent to prosecution case so as to create serious doubts about veracity of statements of two eye witnesses at bail stage---After remaining absconder, accused had been proceeded against under sections 204, 87 and 512 of…
🔒
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