| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2012 SLG 1543 2012 SLD 1543 2012 SCMR 1137 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.358-L of 2012, decision dated: 23rd May, 2012 (Against the order dated 6-3-2011 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No.466-B of 2012)
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA AND IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Petition No.358-L of 2012, decision dated: 23rd May, 2012 (Against the order dated 6-3-2011 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No.466-B of 2012)
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA AND IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
EHSAN ULLAH
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)------S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324/427/109/ 148/149---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Qatl-e-amd, attempt to qatl-e-amd, mischief causing damage, abetment and rioting---Bail, grant of---Version of State and complainant---Distinction---Further inquiry---Accused was nominated in F.I.R. but no specific injury to any person had been attributed to him and only generalized and collective allegation was levelled against him---Investigating agency had reached at definite conclusion that accused was not even present at the scene of crime at relevant time and had provided behind-the-scene abetment to his co-accused for commission of alleged offence---Accused had been recommended for trial only in respect of an offence under S.109, P.P.C.---Prosecution itself had two versions vis-a-vis the accused, first was of complainant party according to which accused was present at the spot and had resorted to firing and second of investigating agency according to which accused was not present at the spot and he was abetting his co-accused behind the scene---Such considerations render the case against accused one of further inquiry into his guilt---Bail was allowed. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(2)---Bail---Abscondence---Further inquiry---In a case calling for further inquiry into the guilt of accused, bail is to be allowed to him as of right and not by way of grace or concession---Mere abscondence of accused person may not be sufficient to refuse bail to him. Muhammad Sadiq v. Sadiq and others PLD 1985 SC 182; Ibrahim v. Hayat Gul and others 1985 SCMR 382 and Qamar alias Mitho v. The State and others PLD 2012 SC 222 rel. C.M. Latif, Advocate-on-Record and Ch. Abdul Ghaffar, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Ms. Tabinda Islam, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A. Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant. Asjad Javaid Ghural, Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd May, 2012. ORDER ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---Through this petition Ehsan Ullah petitioner has sought leave to appeal against the order dated 6-3-2012 (wrongly mentioned in the impugned order…
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