| Case ID |
67e8e909-f7b1-4b3a-b6f5-0e2b86f00174 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Petition No.346 of 2004 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 16, 2004 |
| Hearing Date |
Dec 16, 2004 |
| Decision |
After a comprehensive review of the evidence presented, including the post-mortem reports and testimonies from two prosecution witnesses, the Supreme Court of Pakistan upheld the High Court's decision to deny bail to the accused, Syed Maqbool Muhammad. The Court determined that the evidence established a prima facie case under section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code, justifying the refusal of bail. The counter-F.I.R. lodged by the accused was deemed unreliable and subsequently canceled by the police. The Supreme Court found no arbitrary or perverse exercise of discretion by the High Court in declining bail, affirming the decision as lawful and appropriate. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was dismissed, and bail was refused to the accused. The Court emphasized that the refusal of bail in this context does not prejudice the merits of the trial, ensuring that the judicial process remains impartial and just. |
| Summary |
In the landmark case of Syed Maqbool Muhammad vs. The State, the Supreme Court of Pakistan deliberated on the refusal of bail requested by the petitioner in a high-stakes murder case. Heard on December 16, 2004, and cited as 2005 SLD 1184 = 2005 SCMR 635, the case revolved around the tragic murder of Fateh Muhammad Jakhrani, who succumbed to firearm injuries. The petitioner, Syed Maqbool Muhammad, was charged under Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Sections 302/324 of the Penal Code for the alleged murder by causing firearm injuries.
The incident unfolded on May 10, 2004, at Police Station Baldia, Hyderabad, where the complainant, Qazi Talmeez alias Taani, accused the petitioner of opening fire during a confrontation in a bungalow, leading to the death of Fateh Muhammad Jakhrani. Despite the petitioner lodging a counter-F.I.R., it was later deemed false and canceled following police investigation. The prosecution's case was fortified by post-mortem reports and the testimonies of two prosecution witnesses, establishing a prima facie case against the petitioner.
Represented by Abdul Hafeez Pirzada and M.S. Khattak, the petitioner argued for bail, citing counterclaims of being a victim and highlighting delays in witness testimonies. However, the prosecution, led by Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali, refuted these claims, emphasizing the reliability of the evidence and the cancellation of the counter-F.I.R. The High Court of Sindh, in its decision on August 20, 2004, denied bail, a decision that was upheld by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court analyzed the evidence meticulously, including the post-mortem findings and witness statements, concluding that the prosecution had established sufficient grounds for refusal of bail under the relevant sections of the law. The Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, reinforcing the High Court's decision as neither arbitrary nor perverse.
This case underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that bail decisions are grounded in substantive evidence rather than procedural technicalities. It highlights the application of Section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code in cases involving serious offenses like murder, where the risk of flight or tampering with evidence necessitates stringent bail conditions.
Moreover, the Supreme Court's reliance on precedents such as Shoaib Mehmood Butt v. Iftikhar-ul-Haq and Muhammad Khan v. Maula Bakhsh underscores the importance of consistent judicial reasoning in bail matters. The decision reaffirms the standards courts must adhere to when evaluating bail applications, ensuring that the rights of the accused are balanced against the interests of justice and public safety.
In conclusion, Syed Maqbool Muhammad vs. The State serves as a critical reference point for future bail applications in criminal cases within Pakistan, emphasizing the judiciary's role in maintaining legal integrity and safeguarding societal interests through judicious deliberation and evidence-based decision-making. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Sikandar,
Fateh Muhammad Jakhrani,
Qazi Talmeez alias Taani,
Usman Aalmani Baloch,
Ali Jamot,
Zahid Khan Jakhrani
|
| Judges |
Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan,
Faqir Muhammad Khokhar,
M. Javed Buttar
|
| Lawyers |
Abdul Hafeez Pirzada,
M.S. Khattak,
Dr. Qazi Khalid Ali
|
| Petitioners |
Syed Maqbool Muhammad
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
2005 SLD 1184 = 2005 SCMR 635
|
| Other Citations |
Shoaib Mehmood Butt v. Iftikhar-ul-Haq and 3 others 1996 SCMR 1845,
Muhammad Khan v. Maula Bakhsh and another 1998 SCMR 570
|
| Laws Involved |
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Penal Code (XLV of 1860),
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
|
| Sections |
S.497,
302,
324,
Art.185(3)
|