SCMR 2024

2024 PLP 1716 (SCMR)

ZEESHAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Petition No.556 of 2024, decided on 26th July, 2024.
Honorable Judges
Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2024 PLP 1716 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Shahid Bilal Hassan, JJ
Parties ZEESHAN — 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 1716 (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 1716 (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 1716 (SCMR) (ZEESHAN — 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

  • Astaghfirullah, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
  • Hussain Ali, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
  • 2. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General, KPK and learned counsel for the complainant, we have perused the available record which reveals that the petitioner remained absconder for almost seven months.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal against the judgment dated 06.05.2024 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in Crl. M.B.A. No. 1612-P of 2024).

S. 497(2)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324 & 427

Qatl-i-amd, attempt to qatl-i-amd and causing damage to property

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Rule of consistency

Trial, commencement of

Absconsion

Weapon not recovered

Petitioner accused was arrested for committing qatl-i-amd after remaining absconder for seven months

Neither injury statement of alleged injured was prepared nor there was any medical report about his alleged firearm injury

No recovery of firearm was effected from petitioner/accused during investigation

Investigation was complete, challan had been submitted and trial had commenced

Charge was read over to accused persons by Trial Court but so far statements of prosecution witnesses had not been recorded at trial

Co-accused had already been granted post-arrest bail by the Supreme Court

On tentative assessment of material available on record case against petitioner/accused fell within the ambit of further inquiry

On the basis of rule of consistency petitioner accused was also entitled for grant of post-arrest bail

Mere absconsion of petitioner accused for almost seven months could not be made a basis to refuse him post-arrest bail

Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and bail was allowed. Noroz Khan, Addl.A.G., KPK for the State. Hussain Ali, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.

Judgment & Decree

NAEEM AKHTAR AFGHAN, J.

The petitioner is seeking post-arrest bail under section 302/324/427/34, P.P.C. in FIR No. 1039/23 lodged with Police Station (PS) Faqirabad, Peshawar on 20 August 2023 by Qaiser Jamal son of Syed Jamal (Complainant) with regard to the occurrence of 15:45 pm dated 20 August 2023 with the statement that on the property of Aukaf situated in Qazi Abad he has a dispute with his relative Anwar and case is pending before the Court. At 11:00 am the Aukaf employees and police came and got the construction work stopped and the Baithek was locked by the Aukaf employees. When the police and Aukaf employees returned, the petitioner along with co-accused Sher Ali and Shahab Kamal came with firearms, they broke the lock of Baithek and started hue and cry with inhabitants of the Mohallah. In the meanwhile he along with his brother Shahid Jamal and sons Haider Jamal and Kashif Jamal reached there. They were fired upon by the above four accused with intention to commit their murder. Due to firing of the accused, his brother Shahid Jamal received firearm injury on his neck while his son Haider Jamal received injury on his left hand. Both the injured were taken to the hospital. The injured Shahid Jamal succumbed to the injuries on his way to the hospital.

2. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General, KPK and learned counsel for the complainant, we have perused the available record which reveals that the petitioner remained absconder for almost seven months.

3. Neither injury statement of the alleged injured Haider Jamal was prepared nor there is any medical report about his alleged firearm injury. No recovery of firearm has been effected from the petitioner during investigation. On completion of investigation Challan has been submitted and the trial has commenced. Charge has been read over to the petitioner and co-accused Syed Shahab Ali Shah by the Trial Court but so far statements of the prosecution witnesses have not been recorded at the trial.

4. Co-accused Syed Shahab Ali Shah has already been granted post-arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 4 December 2023.

5. On the basis of tentative assessment of the material available on record the case against the petitioner falls within the ambit of further inquiry. Due to grant of post-arrest bail to co-accused Syed Shahab Ali Shah by this Court, on the basis of rule of consistency as well, the petitioner is entitled for grant of post-arrest bail.

6. In view of the above circumstances, mere absconsion of the petitioner for almost seven months cannot be made a basis to refuse him post-arrest bail.

7. For the above reasons, while granting leave, the petition is converted into appeal and same is accepted. The petitioner is granted post-arrest bail under sections 302/324/427/34, P.P.C. in FIR No. 1039/23 PS Faqirabad, Peshawar subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- with PR bond of like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and same shall not influence merits of the case at the trial. MH/Z-3/SC Bail allowed.