2020 PLP 1198 (SCMR)
GHULAM ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2020 PLP 1198 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Umar Ata Bandial, Faisal Arab and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 PLP 1198 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 PLP 1198 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Umar Ata Bandial, Faisal Arab and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP 1198 (SCMR) (GHULAM ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Saleemullah Ranazai, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Ms. Aysha Tasneem, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
- 3. Acquittal of co-accused, initially arrayed as unknown, has not been received as a valid ground for petitioner's release on bail, both by the Court of Session as well as the High Court, a view found by us as unexceptionable. Similarly, petitioner's advanced age with health, statedly frail, albeit with no specific disorder cannot extenuate abscondance of almost 16 years having regard to the fatal role assigned to him. Statements of the witnesses including an injured supported by medical evidence constitute "reasonable grounds" within the contemplation of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, aggravated by petitioner's absence going on for an age, unsurmountably stand in impediment to his release on bail, a concession discretionary in nature. View taken by the High Court, being within the bounds of law, does not call for interference. Petition fails. Leave declined.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 4.3.2020 passed by the Peshawar High Court D.I. Khan Bench in Cr. Misc. B.A. No. 61-D of 2020)
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b) & 324
Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd
Advanced age of accused with allegedly frail health, albeit with no specific disorder could not extenuate his abscondance for almost 16 years having regard to the fatal role assigned to him
Statements of the witnesses including an injured witness were supported by medical evidence
In view of such circumstances aggravated by lengthy absence of accused from the law constituted "reasonable grounds" within the contemplation of S. 497, Cr.P.C. to refuse discretionary relief of bail to the accused
Furthermore acquittal of co-accused, initially arrayed as unknown, was rightly not treated as a valid ground by the Trial Court and High Court to grant bail to accused
Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and accused was refused bail. Ms. Aysha Tasneem, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
Abdul Latif, deceased, along with Muhammad Hanif and Hafiz Muhammad Rafique, PWs, was on way to attend Court proceedings on 22.12.2004 when at 8:15 p.m. within the remit of Police Station City Dera Ismail Khan, Ghulam Abbas petitioner, on a motorbike, driven by co-accused, subsequently identified as Iftikhar Ahmed, intercepted the entourage; repeated fire shots fatally hit the deceased while Muhammad Hanif PW survived the gunshot. Previous blood feud is cited as motive for the crime. Petitioner stayed away from the law and was finally arrested on 14.1.2020; co-accused was acquitted during his absence.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Acquittal of co-accused, initially arrayed as unknown, has not been received as a valid ground for petitioner's release on bail, both by the Court of Session as well as the High Court, a view found by us as unexceptionable. Similarly, petitioner's advanced age with health, statedly frail, albeit with no specific disorder cannot extenuate abscondance of almost 16 years having regard to the fatal role assigned to him. Statements of the witnesses including an injured supported by medical evidence constitute "reasonable grounds" within the contemplation of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, aggravated by petitioner's absence going on for an age, unsurmountably stand in impediment to his release on bail, a concession discretionary in nature. View taken by the High Court, being within the bounds of law, does not call for interference. Petition fails. Leave declined. MWA/G-8/SC Bail refused.