2021 PLP 1476 (SCMR)
MASVEER AHMED alias AZIZ AHMED — Petitioner Versus AZHAR ALI and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2021 PLP 1476 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Qazi Faez Isa, Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Yahya Afridi, JJ |
| Parties | MASVEER AHMED alias AZIZ AHMED — Petitioner Versus AZHAR ALI and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2021 PLP 1476 (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 2021 PLP 1476 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Qazi Faez Isa, Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel and Yahya Afridi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2021 PLP 1476 (SCMR) (MASVEER AHMED alias AZIZ AHMED — Petitioner Versus AZHAR ALI and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Samad, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Ajmal Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Arshad Jamal Qureshi, Advocate Supreme Court along with Azhar Ali for Respondent No. 1.
- 3. The learned Additional Advocate General, KPK supports the petition. The learned counsel for respondent No. 1 states that the said respondent has been on bail for over three years and despite submission of challan in the month of November, 2015 the charge has still not been framed. He further states that the delay in the commencement and conclusion of the trial has not been attributed to respondent No. 1 nor to the co-accused Zulfiqar, who was arrested in the month of November, 2015 nor have they abused the concession of bail in any manner. The objective of the present petition, according to the learned counsel, is to pressurize the respondent No. 1 and his family to compromise the criminal case in which the respondent No. l's father was murdered and wherein the father of the petitioner has been nominated as an accused, and who has remained an absconder therein. The petitioner too has become an absconder in another criminal case. He concludes by stating that the co-accused Zulfiqar had also secured bail and the application for cancellation of his bail submitted before the High Court was dismissed in default on 13th April, 2018 and no step taken to resurrect the application nor has the said dismissal order been assailed before this Court.
- 5. The learned counsel for respondent No. 1 on his behalf and learned Additional Advocate General, KPK on behalf of the State undertake that no unnecessary adjournments will be sought in the pending trial. The Trial Court should therefore ensure the expeditious disposal of the case which is an old one.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment dated 16.03.2015 of the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Crl. Misc. B.A. No. 346-P of 2015)
S. 497(5)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324 & 34
Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention
Petition for cancellation of bail, dismissal of
Contentions on behalf of accused-respondent that he had been on bail for over three years and despite submission of challan about 2 years and 10 months ago the charge had still not been framed; that the delay in the commencement and conclusion of the trial had not been attributed to the accused or the co-accused, and both of them had not abused the concession of bail in any manner; that the objective of the present petition for cancellation of bail, was to pressurize the accused and his family to compromise a criminal case in which the accused's father was murdered and wherein the father of the petitioner had been nominated as a culprit, and who had remained an absconder therein; that the petitioner too had become an absconder in another criminal case; that the co-accused also secured bail and the application for cancellation of his bail submitted before the High Court was dismissed in default and no step was taken to resurrect the application nor had the said dismissal order been assailed before the Supreme Court
In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it would not be appropriate for the Supreme Court to interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court (in granting bail to the accused) particularly as the accused had remained on bail for over three and a half years and it was not alleged that he has been responsible for the delay or misused the concession of bail in any manner
Petition for leave to appeal seeking cancellation of bail granted to accused was dismissed and leave was refused. Mujahid Ali Khan, Additional A.G., Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for the State.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI FAEZ ISA, J. Through this petition, petitioner seeks cancellation of bail granted to respondent No. 1 by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar vide judgment dated 16th March, 2015 in case FIR No.567 dated 1st August, 2014 registered for offences under sections 324 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station .Khazana, District Peshawar.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that three persons were nominated for causing injuries to three persons, namely, Masveer, Baseer Ahmed and Musam Khan, therefore, the reasons which prevailed with the learned judge of the High Court in granting bail was not sustainable particularly as different sets of bullet casings were recovered from the crime scene.
3. The learned Additional Advocate General, KPK supports the petition. The learned counsel for respondent No. 1 states that the said respondent has been on bail for over three years and despite submission of challan in the month of November, 2015 the charge has still not been framed. He further states that the delay in the commencement and conclusion of the trial has not been attributed to respondent No. 1 nor to the co-accused Zulfiqar, who was arrested in the month of November, 2015 nor have they abused the concession of bail in any manner. The objective of the present petition, according to the learned counsel, is to pressurize the respondent No. 1 and his family to compromise the criminal case in which the respondent No. l's father was murdered and wherein the father of the petitioner has been nominated as an accused, and who has remained an absconder therein. The petitioner too has become an absconder in another criminal case. He concludes by stating that the co-accused Zulfiqar had also secured bail and the application for cancellation of his bail submitted before the High Court was dismissed in default on 13th April, 2018 and no step taken to resurrect the application nor has the said dismissal order been assailed before this Court.
4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it would not be appropriate for this Court to interfere with the discretion exercised by the learned High Court particularly as respondent No. 1 has remained on bail for over three and a half years and it is not alleged that he has been responsible for the delay or misused the concession of bail in any manner. Under such circumstances, leave to appeal is declined and, consequently, the petition is dismissed.
5. The learned counsel for respondent No. 1 on his behalf and learned Additional Advocate General, KPK on behalf of the State undertake that no unnecessary adjournments will be sought in the pending trial. The Trial Court should therefore ensure the expeditious disposal of the case which is an old one. MWA/M-48/SC Petition dismissed. * Received in 2021