| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 3113 2016 SLD 3113 2016 MLD 837 |
Peshawar High Court
Cr. Misc. BCA No. 157-P of 2015, decided on 4th May, 2015. Date of hearing: 4th May, 2015.
ASSADULLAH KHAN CHAMKANI, JUSTICE
Ishtiaq Ibrahim for Petitioner. Astaghfirullah for
Respondent. Malik Manzoor Hussain for
Respondent.
Cr. Misc. BCA No. 157-P of 2015, decided on 4th May, 2015. Date of hearing: 4th May, 2015.
ASSADULLAH KHAN CHAMKANI, JUSTICE
Ishtiaq Ibrahim for Petitioner. Astaghfirullah for
Respondent. Malik Manzoor Hussain for
Respondent.
KIFAYAT ULLAH - er
VS
SANA ULLAH - --Respondent
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) --------- ----------S. 497(5) --------- Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 109 & 34 --------- Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act (XXIII of 2013), S.15-AA --------- Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention --------- Bail, cancellation of --------- Principles governing grant and cancellation of bail --------- Case being based on circumstantial evidence, it was yet to be determined during trial after recording evidence as to whether of circumstantial evidence, had made an unbroken chain to touch its one end the dead body of the deceased and other the neck of accused --------- Tentative assessment of the material available on record showed that in absence of direct evidence, case of accused required further probe into his guilt; on the basis whereof, the lower court was justified to grant him concession of bail --------- Principles governing grant of bail and cancellation of bail, stood substantially on different footings --------- Once bail had been granted by a competent court of law, strong and exceptional grounds were required for cancellation thereof --------- Court had to see as to whether the bail granting order was patently illegal, erroneous factually incorrect and had resulted in miscarriage of justice --------- Courts were always slow to cancel bail already granted as the liberty of a person could not be curtailed on flimsy grounds, because cancellation of bail was a harsh step, as it interfered with the liberty of an individual, hence, it was not to be resorted to lightly --------- Power to take back accused in custody, was to be exercised with care and circumspection --------- Section 497(5), Cr.P.C., did not command the court to cancel the bail even when the offence was punishable with death or imprisonment for life and where the grant of bail was prohibited under S.497(1), Cr.P.C. --------- No interference with bail granting order was required, unless the same lacked reasons, or was perfunctory in nature --------- Curtailing the liberty of a person on bail, the prosecution should make out a case for cancellation, by not making allegations alone, but by giving substantive proof of such allegations --------- APPLICANT…
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