| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2902 2017 SLD 2902 2017 PLD 55 |
High Court (AJ&K)
Criminal Revision No. 114 of 2016, decision Date : 15-03-2017
MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, JUSTICE
Hafiz Fazal ur Rehman Dar, Assistant Advocate-General for the State/Petitioner. Raja Waseem Younis Khan, Advocate for Accused-
Respondents.
Criminal Revision No. 114 of 2016, decision Date : 15-03-2017
MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, JUSTICE
Hafiz Fazal ur Rehman Dar, Assistant Advocate-General for the State/Petitioner. Raja Waseem Younis Khan, Advocate for Accused-
Respondents.
THE STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE STATE OF J&K, MUZAFFARABAD
VS
MUHAMMAD IDREES JARRAL & ANOTHER
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 497(5)
Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
Section: 6(2)
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,279,324,337-F(i)(iv),337-G,353
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(5)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.324, 337-F(i)(iv), 337-G, 353, 279 & 34---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.6(2)---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, causing Damiah, Mudihah, hurt by rash or negligent driving, rash driving, assault or criminal force, common intention---Bail, grant of---During investigation offences under S.324, P.P.C., and S.6(2) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 were added, but later on after investigation same had been deleted by the Police as no evidence could be recorded in relation to those offences---After completion of evidence challan had been submitted for the offences under Ss.337-F(i)(iv), 337-G, 353, 279 & 34, P.P.C. and in view of punishment provided for said offences, case of accused persons did not come within the ambit of prohibited clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Investigation in the case had been completed and challan had been submitted before the Trial Court---Accused persons were no more required for investigation---Bail in such like cases, was rule and its refusal was an exception---If the court of competent jurisdiction had released accused on bail, very strong and exceptional grounds were required to cancel the same---No allegation was on record to the effect that accused persons after the occurrence had committed any other offence; or they had misused the concession of bail; or they were tampering or interfering with the prosecution evidence---In absence of exceptional grounds or circumstances, order granting bail by the Trial Court, did not require any interference by High Court. PLD 1996 SC 241; 2014 PCr.LJ 1512 and 2014 SCR 234 rel. THIS JUDGMENT PASSED BY: MUHAMMAD SHERAZ KIANI, JUSTICE:---.--- he above captioned revision petition calls in question the validity and legality of the order passed by the learned Judge Ehtesab Court/Anti Terrorism Court, Mirpur on 03.06.2016, whereby, the learned Court below has confirmed the post-arrest bail, granted, to the petitioner, in the offences under Sections 147/149, 279/337-F(I-VI), 337-F(I) (IV), 337A(I) , and Section 6 (2) ATA. 2. Precise facts of the instant revision petition are that a case under the above sections was…
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