| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1703 2017 SLD 1703 2017 SCMR 538 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 1287 of 2016, decision & hearing Date : 12-01-2017. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 28.10.2016 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Bannu Bench in Crl. Misc. Jail Application 350-B of 2016)
MUSHIR ALAM, JUSTICE, DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE
Amjad Iqbal Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Fayyaz Ahmed Sherazi, Advocate-on-Record (Absent) for Petitioners. Muhammad Aslam Ghumman, Advocate Supreme Court and Munawar Khan, ASI/IO for the State.
Criminal Petition No. 1287 of 2016, decision & hearing Date : 12-01-2017. (On appeal from the judgment Dated 28.10.2016 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Bannu Bench in Crl. Misc. Jail Application 350-B of 2016)
MUSHIR ALAM, JUSTICE, DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE
Amjad Iqbal Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Fayyaz Ahmed Sherazi, Advocate-on-Record (Absent) for Petitioners. Muhammad Aslam Ghumman, Advocate Supreme Court and Munawar Khan, ASI/IO for the State.
AWAL KHAN AND 7 OTHERS
VS
THE STATE THROUGH AGKPK AND ANOTHER
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 497(2)
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Contradiction between medical evidence and ocular account---Accused persons, nine in number, were alleged to have fired at the complainant party with Kalashnikovs---Number of injuries on the person of the deceased and the two injured persons suggested that the noose had been thrown much wider by the complainant, charging two real brothers and their sons and an unknown accused---Kalashnikov rifle was a very formidable weapon and if nine persons had participated in the crime, as alleged by the complainant, none would have escaped alive and the nature and size of injuries would have been different from the ones stated in the medical report---Recovery of two 12 bore empties from the site would further strengthen the view that the two injured had sustained shot gun injuries with pallets and not with Kalashnikov bullets, as alleged by the complainant---Medical evidence showed a single inlet and exit wound on the deceased and two shot gun injuries on the injured victims, which suggested that at most two persons participated in the occurrence, whereas, complainant had implicated nine persons for effectively airing at complainant party---Contradiction between the ocular account and medical evidence had rendered the case of the accused persons to be one of further inquiry---Accused persons were enlarged on bail accordingly. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497--- Bail--- Benefit of doubt---Scope---When the medical evidence was in conflict with the ocular account then, benefit of doubt at bail stage must go to the accused. Khan Mir v. Amal Sherin 1989 SCMR 1987; Muhammad Hanif v. Manzoor and 2 others NLR 1981 SC 367 and Syed Khalid Hussain Shah v. The State 2014 SCMR 12 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, JUSTICE:---.--- Petitioners (i) Awal Khan (ii) Shahid Khan (sons of Maula Dad Khan), (iii) Jahangir (iv) Munawar Khan (v) Sadaqat Khan (vi) Kaleem Ullah (sons of Awal Khan) (vii) Khalid Khan and (viii) Sahukat Khan (sons of Shadi Khan), seek leave to appeal against the judgment/order dated 28.10.2016 rendered by the learned Single Judge of the…
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