Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 497(5) & 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324/148/ 149/411---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Qatl-e-amd, attempt to commit qatl-e-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly, dishonestly receiving stolen property--- Petition for cancellation of bail---Accused (respondent) had not been nominated in the F.I.R. in any capacity whatsoever and his name had surfaced in the case for the first time through a supplementary statement made by the complainant (petitioner) and also through statements made by the eye-witnesses under S.161, Cr.P.C.---Complainant was not an eye-witness of the alleged occurrence---Accused was not connected with the motive set-up in the F.I.R.---Accused was not visible as one of the assailants present at the scene of the crime at the relevant time in the Closed-circuit Television (CCTV) footage of the occurrence---Although the accused had remained a fugitive from the law and had been declared a proclaimed offender, but in a case calling for further inquiry into the guilt of the accused , bail was to be allowed to him as a matter of right and not by way of grace and concession---Investigation of the case had been finalized and challan had been submitted, therefore, physical custody of the accused was not required for the purposes of investigation---No allegation or material had been brought on the record regarding any misuse or abuse of the concession of bail by the accused---Petition for cancellation of bail/leave to appeal was dismissed, in circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Bail---Case of further inquiry---Abscondment of the accused---Effect---Where a case called for further inquiry into the guilt of an accused, bail was to be allowed to him as a matter of right and not by way of grace or concession---Bail was sometimes refused to an accused person on account of his abscondment but such refusal of bail proceeded primarily upon the question of propriety, and whenever a question of propriety was confronted with a question of a right, the latter must prevail. Ibrahim v. Hayat Gul and others 1985 SCMR 382; Muhammad Sadiq v.…

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