| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2008 SLG 1838 2008 SLD 1838 2008 SCMR 1381 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.765 of 2006, decision dated: 11-06-2008.(On appeal from the judgment, dated 21-6-2006 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Appeal No.1779 of 2005)
SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, SHEIKH HAKIM ALI AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, JJ
Sardar M. Latif Khan Khosa, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Mian Muhammad Nawaz, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Kh. Sultan Ahmed, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 2 with respondent Allah Bak
Criminal Appeal No.765 of 2006, decision dated: 11-06-2008.(On appeal from the judgment, dated 21-6-2006 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Appeal No.1779 of 2005)
SAIYED SAEED ASHHAD, SHEIKH HAKIM ALI AND MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, JJ
Sardar M. Latif Khan Khosa, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Mian Muhammad Nawaz, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant. Kh. Sultan Ahmed, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent No. 2 with respondent Allah Bak
ABDUL REHMAN
VS
THE STATE and another
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---S. 426---Suspension of sentence and grant of bail by High Court---Validity---Bail was granted by High Court mainly on the grounds that the Trial Court had observed in its that prosecution witnesses were not present at the scene of occurrence and had not witnessed the same; that all the investigations had opined that the complainant and prosecution witnesses were not present at the scene of occurrence nor the occurrence had taken place in the manner asserted by the prosecution---Conclusion arrived at by the Trial Court that witnesses were not present at the time of occurrence was based on reasons and was not based merely on the opinion of the police---Trial Court had also recorded that empties recovered from the spot did not tally with the weapon recovered at the instance of the accused---Merits of the case could be looked into at the time of hearing of application for suspension of sentence---Impugned order of the High Court being neither whimsical nor fanciful nor arbitrary and reasons recorded by the High Court were borne out from the record, Supreme Court declined interference. Moonda and others v. The State PLD 1958 SC (Pak.) 275; Farman Ali and 2 others v. The State 1993 SCMR 2055; Waris Ali and 5 others v. The State 2001 SCMR 640; Babar Ali v. Bashir Ahmed and another 2007 SCMR 184 distinguished. Muhammad Akram v. The State 1994 SCMR 277 and Sajjad Bashir v. The State PLD 1995 SC 576 ref JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, J.--- Allah Bakhsh respondent No.2 along with three others faced trial under section 302 for causing murders of Amjad and Abdul Rauf. All the four accused were convicted for offence under section 302(b), P.P.C. on two counts. Ghulam Mustafa and Shah Rasool co-accused were sentenced to death while Allah Bakhsh respondent and Zulfiqar were sentenced to imprisonment for life, on two counts. 2. During pendency of appeal vide order, dated 21-6-2006, learned Division Bench of Lahore High Court Lahore while suspending the sentence admitted Allah Bakhsh respondent to bail. The bail was granted to the respondent mainly on the grounds that the learned trial Court had observed in its judgment that the P.Ws. were…
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