| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 323 2024 SLD 323 2024 CLD 392 |
Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench
B.A. No. 237-M of 2023, decision dated: 20th April, 2023.Date of hearing: 20th April, 2023.
Before Shahid Khan, J
Muhammad Amin Khan for Petitioner. Syed Sultanat Khan, Assistant A.G. and Imran Khan for
Respondents.
B.A. No. 237-M of 2023, decision dated: 20th April, 2023.Date of hearing: 20th April, 2023.
Before Shahid Khan, J
Muhammad Amin Khan for Petitioner. Syed Sultanat Khan, Assistant A.G. and Imran Khan for
Respondents.
SALMAN KHAN---Petitioner
VS
The STATE and another---Respondents
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 497
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 377,506
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497, third and fourth provisos---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 377 & 506---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Child Protection and Welfare Act (XIII of 2010), S. 53---Unnatural offences and criminal intimidation if threat be to cause death or grievous hurt etc.---Bail, refusal of---Statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial---Contributory delay---Gravity of the act alleged---Scope---Although the delay in conclusion of trial was floating on the surface of the record, however, it had to be determined that delay-in-question was, prima facie, willful and deliberate and could only be attributed to the prosecution or the same was a contributory delay in which the defence was equally responsible to delay the conclusion of the event followed by its adjudication on its merits---Record revealed that there was a contributory delay, in conclusion of trial, either on the part of the petitioner/accused, prosecution, or otherwise due to the strikes etc.---Even the trial had been adjourned, for considerable number of dates of hearing, on the Reader-Note for the want of Presiding Officer---Periods of contribution in delay-in-question could not be attributed to a single functionary of the Court i.e prosecution or defence or otherwise, rather it was a contributory delay, on which score alone, it would be un-wise that, while holding the prosecution responsible, the petitioner/accused be allowed a walk-over or a chance to encash the delay and not to shoulder the responsibility of the contributory delay---Petitioner/accused had allegedly been charged for committing unnatural act with a minor/victim---Fourth proviso of S. 497 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 was fully attracted in petitioner's case, therefore, he could not be extended the benefit of third proviso of S. 497 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898---Bail was declined to the petitioner/accused, in circumstances. Allah Wasaya v. The State and others PLD 2022 SC 541 and Rehmat Ullah v. The State and another 2011 SCMR 1332 ref. ORDER SHAHID KHAN, J.---This order is directed to dispose of an application filed by the petitioner namely Salman Khan for the grant of post arrest bail in…
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