Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLG 1460 2026 SLD 1460 = 2026 PLJ 23
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Crl. P. No. 978 of 2025, decided on 20.8.2025. (Against order dated 14.05.2025 of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench passed in Crl. Misc. No. 3798-B of 2025)
Presented By: Athar Minallah, Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan and Salahuddin Panhwar, JJ.
Mr. Muhammad Bilal Butt, ASC and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR for Petitioner. Rana Asadullah Khan, Addl. Attorney General for State. Complainant in person. Date of hearing: 20.8.2025.

ZAHID SIDDIQUE--Petitioner

VERSUS

STATE and another--Respondents

Law: Criminal Procedure Code, 1898

Section: 497

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 419,420,468,471,406,109,34

PLJ 2026 SC (Cr.C.) 23 [Appellate Jurisdiction] Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898--Sections 419,420,468,471,406,109 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860--Post arrest bail--Grant of--Investigation to the extent of the petitioner has been completed--Whether or not the petitioner is involved in preparing any document that had led to the commission of offence requires further probe--The offence falls within the non-prohibitory clause--Petition is converted into an appeal and allowed.         [Pp. 24 & 25] A & B Order Athar Minallah, J.--The petitioner along with several other co-accused were nominated in Crime Report. No. 60/2025 dated 20.03.2025 registered at Police Station FIA/CC, Multan for the commission of the alleged offences under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 406, 109 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (PPC) read with Sections 13 and 14 of the Prevention of Electronics Crimes Act, 2016. 2.       The petitioner had sought post arrest bail and it was declined by the trial Court vide order dated 28.04.2025. His petition before the High Court did not find favour and, therefore, it was dismissed vide the impugned order dated 14.05.2025. 2A.     We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Law Officer. The record has also been perused with their able assistance. 3.       The petitioner along with several other co-accused were alleged to have been involved in the commission of the offence. The investigation to the extent of the petitioner has been completed. The case of the prosecution is based on documentary evidence and the same is in possession of the Investigating Officer. Whether or not the petitioner is involved in preparing any…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register