2016 PLP 1523 (SCMR)
ABDUL GHAFFAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2016 PLP 1523 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Sardar Tariq Masood, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL GHAFFAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2016 PLP 1523 (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 2016 PLP 1523 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Sardar Tariq Masood, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2016 PLP 1523 (SCMR) (ABDUL GHAFFAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.D. Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Ch. Din Muhammad Meo, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.2.
- Date of hearing: 9th March, 2016.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 26-11-2015 passed in Crl. Misc. No. 12755-CB of 2015)
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 377
Sample for DNA test was sent to the Forensic Science Agency
Doctor in his final opinion had opined that no act of sodomy was committed
Further the accused remained behind bars for about nine months
Case of the accused called for further inquiry in the light of the opinion of the doctor
High Court had fallen in error in setting aside the bail granting order passed by the Trial Court
Order passed by Trial Court granting bail to accused was restored accordingly. Asjad Javaid Ghural, Additional P.-G. and Naimat, SI for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.
C.M.A. No. 51-L of 2016. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and delay in filing the criminal petition is condoned. Crl. P. No. 118-L of 2016
2. Petitioner calls in question the order dated 26.11.2015 passed by the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby petition for cancellation of bail filed by respondent No.2/complainant was allowed and the order dated 02.09.2015 granting bail to the petitioner or passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chunian was set aside.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, learned Additional Prosecutor General and having gone through the material available on record as well as the impugned order, it has been observed that sample for DNA test was sent to the Punjab Forensic Science Agency on 26.01.2015 and after receipt of report dated 03.06.2015, the doctor in his final opinion dated 27.07.2015 has opined, which has been confirmed by the learned Additional Prosecutor General, that no act of sodomy was committed in this case. We have further noted that petitioner remained behind the bars for about nine months. In this view of the matter, we find that the learned High Court has fallen in error in setting aside the bail granting order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in favour of the petitioner as the case of the petitioner in the light of the opinion of the doctor calls for further enquiry.
4. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is converted into appeal and the same is allowed. The impugned order of the learned High Court dated 26.11.2015 is set aside and that of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 02.09.2015 granting bail to the petitioner is restored. MWA/A-16/SC Bail granted.