| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 2667 2006 SLD 2667 2006 SCMR 1292 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.122 of 2005, decision dated: 14-04-2006 (On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 21-2-2005 passed by Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 385 of 2004)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J. MIAN SHAKIRULLAH, JAN AND SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Petition No.122 of 2005, decision dated: 14-04-2006 (On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 21-2-2005 passed by Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 385 of 2004)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J. MIAN SHAKIRULLAH, JAN AND SYED, JAMSHED ALI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Raja MUHAMMAD IRSHAD
VS
MUHAMMAD BASHIR GORAYA and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 497(1)---Bail---While considering the request of the accused for his release on bail, a deep appreciation of evidence is not called for and the Court seized of the matter in terms of S.497(1), Cr.P.C. is required to make tentative assessment of evidence available on record. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 497(1), 498 & 164---Bail---Matters which the Court can consider at bail stage---Contradictions in F.I.R. and confession cannot be discarded at bail stage---Confession under S.164, Cr.P.C. cannot be brushed aside because its voluntariness and truthfulness shall be taken into consideration by the Court at the time of trial---"Confessional statement" of co-accused which prima facie had connected the accused with the commission of offence could not be termed as "extra judicial confession", and there would be no justification in any manner to discard such piece of evidence at bail stage. Naseem Malik v. The State 2004 SCMR 283 ref. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302, 324, 129, 120-B & 34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), 5.497---Bail---Abetment---Co-accused in the case had clearly, said that he was hired by the accused to assassinate the deceased---Evidence brought on record, prima facie, had established that conspiracy was hatched by the accused to kill the deceased as relations between both of them had become so strained that if the deceased had succeeded in furnishing before NAB the evidence of financial embezzlement of the funds of the University against the accused, he would have gone behind the bars, thus for such reason, it was not necessary for the accused to be present at the time of incident. (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 109 & ,120-A---"Abetment" and "conspiracy"---Distinction. State of Andhra Pradesh v. Kandimalla Subbaiah and another AIR 1961 SC 1241; Hulsbery Laws 4th,Edition Vol.11 para.58 page 44; Noor Muhammad Yusuf Momin v. The State of Mahrashtra 1971 SCJ 43 and Bhagwandas Keshwani and others v. State Rajasthan AIR 1974 SC 898 ref. (e) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497(5)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 324, 129, 120-B &…
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