| Case ID |
0b216fa9-2a1a-4d1f-b703-8c9a12713010 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Crl. Misc. B.A. No. 379-B of 2016 |
| Decision Date |
Nov 18, 2016 |
| Hearing Date |
Nov 18, 2016 |
| Decision |
The Peshawar High Court has ruled in favor of granting bail to the petitioner, Sherin. The court acknowledged the petitioner’s involvement in ineffective firing in furtherance of a common object with co-accused individuals. However, it was determined that until sufficient evidence is recorded to establish complicity, denial of bail based solely on the petitioner’s abscondence was not justified under Section 497(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. Consequently, the court accepted the bail application, mandating the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case Crl. Misc. B.A. No. 379-B of 2016, adjudicated by the Peshawar High Court on November 18, 2016, petitioner Sherin sought bail under Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) for charges registered at Police Station Tajori, Lakki Marwat, under Sections 302, 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). The incident involved ineffective firing by Sherin and co-accused, leading to the unfortunate demise of Lal Shah. Despite the initial denial of bail by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, the High Court reevaluated the circumstances, emphasizing the need for comprehensive evidence to substantiate the petitioner’s complicity in the common object with the co-accused. Citing pertinent cases such as 'Muhammad Vs The State (1998 SCMR 454)' and 'The State Vs Malik MukhtarAhmad Awan (1991 SCMR 322)', the court underscored that mere abscondence should not impede bail unless firmly established by law. The decision to grant bail was fortified by the petitioner’s compliance to furnish a bond and provide sureties, reflecting the court’s balanced approach towards justice and legal protocols. This case underscores the judicial system’s commitment to ensuring fair trial rights while meticulously scrutinizing the evidence before rendering decisions on bail applications. Legal professionals and stakeholders can draw insights from this judgment on effectively navigating bail petitions in criminal cases, highlighting the interplay between legal statutes, judicial discretion, and the paramount importance of evidence-based rulings in Pakistan’s legal framework. |
| Court |
Peshawar High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Police Station Tajori,
Lakki Marwat,
Masood-ur-Rehman,
Lal Shah,
Zarkeem Khan,
Hasham
|
| Judges |
ISHTIAQ IBRAHIM
|
| Lawyers |
Mr. Salahud-Din Khan Marood,
Mr. Shahid Hameed
|
| Petitioners |
Sherin
|
| Respondents |
another,
STATE
|
| Citations |
2017 SLD 1181,
2017 PLJ 334
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Vs The state (1998 SCMR 454),
Haji Muhammad Banaras Vs. Muhammad Ayaz and others, (2000 SCMR 1360),
Rab Nawaz Vs. The state (1990 SCMR 1085),
The State Vs Malik MukhtarAhmad Awan (1991 SCMR 322),
Mito Pitaf VS The State (2009 SCMR 299)
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898),
Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
497(2),
302,
324,
148,
149
|