SCMR 2024

2024 PLP 1738 (SCMR)

YAR MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Petition No.271 of 2024, decided on 25th July, 2024.
Honorable Judges
Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2024 PLP 1738 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan, JJ
Parties YAR MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2024 PLP 1738 (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 2024 PLP 1738 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2024 PLP 1738 (SCMR) (YAR MUHAMMAD KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Hussain Ali, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner (through video link from Peshawar).
  • 6. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General, KPK assisted by learned counsel for the Complainant we have perused the available record. On the basis of tentative assessment of the statements of the witnesses of the occurrence, the positive report of the firearm expert and the incriminating material available on record, the petitioner, being prima-facie involved in the commission of heinous non-bailable offences for committing murder of two persons and making murderous assault upon the Complainant and his family members is held not entitled for concession of post-arrest bail at this stage.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal against the judgment dated 15.03.2024 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Crl. Misc. (B.A.) No.372-P/ 2024).

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 337-F (v) & 337-A(i)

Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185 (3)

Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, ghayr-jaifah hashimah and shajjah-i-khafifah

Bail, refusal of

Double murder

Cross version

Positive report of Forensic Science Laboratory

Petitioner (accused) was alleged to have committed murder of two persons and made murderous assault upon complainant

Petitioner accused sought his bail on the plea that it was a case of cross version

Validity

Seven crime empties of 7.62 bore and three crime empties of .30 bore were recovered from place of occurrence by investigating officer in cross-version case

Petitioner accused was arrested and during investigation, on his pointing a Kalashnikov (crime weapon) was recovered from house of his relative

There was positive report of firearm expert and incriminating material available on record

Petitioner accused was prima-facie involved in commission of heinous non-bailable offences for committing murder of two persons and making murderous assault upon complainant and his family members, therefore, he was not entitled for concession of post-arrest bail

Mere registration of counter version of occurrence by petitioner accused in Roznamcha (Daily Book) could not be made a basis to grant him post-arrest bail

Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed, leave was refused and bail was denied. Noroz Khan, Addl.A.G., KPK, Fazil Khan, D.S.P. and Ma'azullah, S.I. for the State. Irfanullah (Brother of complainant) for the Complainant.

Judgment & Decree

NAEEM AKHTAR AFGHAN, J.

The petitioner is seeking post-arrest bail under sections 302/324/337-F(v)/A(i)/337-D/34, P.P.C. and 15-AA in FIR No. 470/23 lodged with Police Station (PS) Mandani, District Charsadda by Asghar Ali (the Complainant) on 11 October 2023 at 14:40 with regard to the occurrence of 11 October 2023 at 13:50 stating therein that at the time of occurrence altercation was going on between his maternal cousin Firdous with the petitioner and his brother Fazal-ur-Rehman. In the meanwhile, when he along with his brother Adnan, his sister in law Mst. Khurmat and his sister Mst. Riffat came out of the house to intervene, on seeing them, the petitioner and his brother, who were standing duly armed, started firing upon them. Due to firing by the petitioner and his brother, he, his brother Irfan and his sister Mst. Riffat got injured while his sister in law Mst. Khurmat died on the spot. His paternal cousin Firdous escaped any firearm injury. Motive of the occurrence was stated to be a dispute on the joint Hujra (Guest Room) between the Complainant party and accused. The injured Mst. Riffat succumbed to the injuries subsequently.

2. Counter version of the above occurrence was recorded in Roznamcha No.19 dated 11 October 2023 at 15:10 under sections 324/ 436/427/148/149/337-(ii)(iii), P.P.C. on the basis of the statement of the petitioner that on the date and time of occurrence when he along with his wife Mst. Sania Bibi were raising construction in front of their Baithek, Firdous and Younas sons of Yaqoob, Nadeem and Irfan sons of Sahib Gul, Azam son of Akbar, Aimal son Zarbakht and Latif came duly armed and after asking them to stop the construction work, they started firing due to which their own relative Firdous and Mst. Sania Bibi (wife of the petitioner) received firearm injuries. Accused Nadeem took out a Churri and caused injuries to him and his wife with Churri. The accused also set on fire his house due to which his house as well as all the household have burnt. The motive of the occurrence was stated to be dispute over joint Hujra (Guest Room).

3. During investigation of FIR No.470/2023 PS Mandani, District Charsadda, fifteen crime empties of 7.62 bore and fifteen crime empties of 9 mm, scattered at the place of occurrence, were taken into possession by the investigating officer. Seven crime empties of 7.62 bore and three crime empties of .30 bore have been shown recovered from the place of occurrence by the investigating officer in the cross-version case.

4. The petitioner was arrested in FIR No. 470/2023. During investigation, on the pointation of the petitioner, on 24 October 2023 a Kalashnikov (crime weapon) was recovered on the disclosure and pointation of the petitioner from the house of his relative Abdullah Shah.

5. The report dated 20 October 2023 of the firearm expert reveals that the seven crime empties of 7.62 bore and three crime empties of .30 bore (shown to be recovered in the cross-version case) were fired from different weapons of 7.62 mm and .30 bore weapons. However, the report dated 31 October 2023 of the firearm expert confirms that the fifteen crime empties of 7.62 bore (recovered in FIR No.470/2023, PS Mandani, District Charsadda) were fired from 7.62 mm bore (SMG) i.e. the Kalashnikov recovered on the disclosure and pointation of the petitioner.

6. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General, KPK assisted by learned counsel for the Complainant we have perused the available record. On the basis of tentative assessment of the statements of the witnesses of the occurrence, the positive report of the firearm expert and the incriminating material available on record, the petitioner, being prima-facie involved in the commission of heinous non-bailable offences for committing murder of two persons and making murderous assault upon the Complainant and his family members is held not entitled for concession of post-arrest bail at this stage.

7. In view of sufficient incriminating material available on record against the petitioner, mere registration of counter version of the occurrence by the petitioner vide Roznamcha No. 19 dated 11 October 2023 cannot be made a basis to grant him post-arrest bail. For the above reasons, the petition is dismissed. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and same shall not influence merits of the case at the trial. MH/Y-1/SC Petition dismissed.