2008 SCMR 1715 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus ZAHID IQBAL and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 SCMR 1715 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan, Zia Perwez and Mian Hamid Farooq, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus ZAHID IQBAL and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 SCMR 1715 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 SCMR 1715 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Ijaz-ul-Hassan Khan, Zia Perwez and Mian Hamid Farooq, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 SCMR 1715 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus ZAHID IQBAL and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Muhammad Arif, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Syed Ehtesham Qadir Shah, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmudul Islam, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos.1 and 2.
- Date of hearing: 22nd July, 2008.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment, dated 26-9-2007 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.4660/B of 2007).
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/148/149
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Strong and exceptional grounds were required for cancellation of bail
Supreme Court ordinarily did not interfere with the order of High Court relating to bail, particularly in case of murder when the trial was to commence so as to avoid discussion and remarks on the merits of the case
Court had to see as to whether bail granting order was patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and had resulted in miscarriage of justice
High Court had granted bail to accused for valid and cogent reasons, which were not open to legitimate exception
Charge had been framed in the case and trial was to commence, as such cancellation of bail at this stage was not desirable
Leave to appeal was declined accordingly.
S. 497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/148/149
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art:185(3)
For cancellation of bail strong and exceptional grounds are required; it has to be seen as to whether order granting bail is patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and has resulted in miscarriage of justice
Supreme Court ordinarily does not interfere with the order of High Court relating to bail, particularly in case of murder, when the trial is to commence so as to avoid discussion and remarks on the merits of the case. Ms. Yasmin Saigol, Deputy Prosecutor-General, Saif Ullah, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Raiwind, Kasur, Rafiq Khan, S.-I./Investigating Officer, Police Station Thahsheikham, Kasur for the State/Respondent No.3.
Judgment & Decree
IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J.
Leave to appeal is sought against the order of Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 26-9-2007 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.466/B of 2007, granting bail to respondents in case F.I.R. No.663 of 2006 dated 5-10-2006 registered under sections 302/148/149, P.P.C. at Police Station Saddar Raiwind, District Kasur, at the instance of complainant Muhammad Akram, brother of Sagheer Ahmad deceased.
2. The facts of the case have been mentioned elaborately in the order impugned, hence reproduction whereof, would be of no use.
3. Rana Muhammad Arif, learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of petition for cancellation of bail, contended that sufficient material was collected during the investigation of the case, connecting the respondents with the commission of crime; that specific role of firing has been attributed to respondents, and that High Court has gone deep and highlighted merits of the case in detail, prejudicing the case of the petitioner.
4. On the contrary, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, refuted the contentions of learned petitioner's counsel and supported the impugned order forcefully.
5. It needs no reiteration that for cancellation of bail, strong and exceptional grounds are required. This Court ordinarily does not interfere with the order of the High Court relating to bail particularly in case of murder when the trial is to commence so as to avoid discussion and remarks on the merits of the case. It is to be seen as to whether order granting bail is patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and has resulted in miscarriage of justice. Considering the case of respondents, on the above touchstone, we are of the view that the High Court has granted bail to respondents for valid and cogent reasons which are not open to legitimate exception. The charge has been framed and trial is to commence as such cancellation of bail at this stage will not be desirable. The petition is dismissed and leave is declined. However, learned trial Court shall conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible not exceeding three months, without being influenced by the observations made in bail granting order. N.H.Q./M-58/SC Leave refused.