2020 PLP 1436 (SCMR)
SHEHRYAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2020 PLP 1436 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | SHEHRYAR KHAN — 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 1436 (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 1436 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 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 1436 (SCMR) (SHEHRYAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Asad Ullah Khan Chamkani, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Anis M. Shahzad, Advocate Supreme Court and Gul Wali, Inspector/I.O. for the State.
- Riazat ul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment dated 3.4.2020 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Cr. M.B.A. No. 446-P of 2020)
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302(b)
Qatl-i-amd
Cross version based upon an injury, sustained by the co-accused, to press into service hypothesis of self defence, was a controversy to be best settled by the Trial Court
Accused party had also suppressed the fatal shot on the deceased in their cross version
Saddled with the responsibility of the fatal shot, accused's absence from law, also stood as an impediment to his release on bail
Given the role attributed to the accused, existence of a cross version, veracity whereof was yet to be settled, by itself would not bring his case within the purview of further probe
Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed and leave was refused. Anis M. Shahzad, Advocate Supreme Court and Gul Wali, Inspector/I.O. for the State. Riazat ul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
Shehryar Khan, petitioner, attributed a fatal shot to Sabir-ur-Rehman, deceased, in his mid 60s, at 9:30 a.m. on 13.04.2019, within the remit of Police Station Daduzai Peshawar, in the backdrop of a dispute over immovable property, seeks admission to bail, primarily on the strength of a 'cross version' structured upon a fire arm injury, sustained by Majid Khan, co-accused, no other than his real brother, medically examined under a police docket on the fateful day. Petitioner, after the incident, stayed away from law and was, accordingly, proceeded under section 512 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898; he was finally taken into custody on 12.02.2020.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. It would be less than expedient to comment upon the merits of the prosecution case, bracing a cross version set up on an injury, sustained by the co-accused, pressed into service with vehemence to construct hypothesis of self defence, a controversy to be best settled by the trial Court. Argument regarding suppression of injury sustained by Majid, co-accused, in the face of identical suppression in the cross version regarding the fatal shot on to the deceased, does not bring petitioner's case at a higher pedestal so as to be received with favour. Saddled with the responsibility of the fatal shot, petitioner's absence from law, additionally, stands in impediment to his release on bail. Given the role attributed to the petitioner, existence of a cross version, veracity whereof is yet to be settled, by itself would not bring his case within the purview of further probe. Petition fails. Leave declined. MWA/S-31/SC Bail refused.