| Case ID |
3235ee78-4848-470a-820f-3a8bfbd4e15b |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Bail Application No. 1230 of 2017 |
| Decision Date |
Oct 25, 2017 |
| Hearing Date |
Oct 17, 2017 |
| Decision |
The bail application of Abdul Razzak was dismissed due to the serious nature of the charges against him, which included the recovery of dangerous explosive materials. The court found that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the accused had committed the alleged offense. The decision emphasized that police personnel are credible witnesses, and the absence of private witnesses does not negate the evidence provided by law enforcement. The court directed that the trial should be completed within two months. |
| Summary |
In the Sindh High Court case concerning the Criminal Bail Application No. 1230 of 2017, the court faced a significant matter involving the accused, Abdul Razzak, who was charged under multiple laws including the Criminal Procedure Code and the Anti Terrorism Act. The case arose from an incident where police recovered explosive materials based on the pointation of the accused, leading to serious charges. The court scrutinized the evidence and highlighted the credibility of police witnesses, ultimately deciding against granting bail. This case underscores the legal ramifications of terrorism-related offenses, and the stringent measures courts may adopt in such scenarios. The ruling reflects the ongoing challenges in maintaining law and order, particularly in Karachi, where the law enforcement agencies are under constant pressure to combat terrorism. Furthermore, the decision serves as a precedent in similar cases, emphasizing the gravity of offenses involving explosives and terrorism, and the role of credible witness testimony in court proceedings. Overall, the case illustrates the delicate balance between individual rights and public safety in the judicial process. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Naimatullah Phulpoto,
Abdul Maalik Gaddi,
Abdul Razzaq
|
| Lawyers |
Ms. Rizwana Mughal,
Muhammad Afzal
|
| Petitioners |
Abdul Razzak
|
| Respondents |
The State
|
| Citations |
2018 SLD 1801,
2018 YLR 1805
|
| Other Citations |
Muhammad Noman v. The State 2017 SCMR 560,
Shan v. The State 2015 PCr.LJ 747,
Zainul Abidin v. The State 2010 MLD 173,
Muhammad Khalid Qureshi v. The State 2009 PCr.LJ 381,
Javid-ur-Rehman and another v. The State 2010 SCMR 1744,
Abdul Sattar and 2 others v. The State 2013 YLR 1364
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Anti Terrorism Act, 1997,
Explosive Substances Act, 1908
|
| Sections |
497,
7,
4,
5
|