2021 PLP 1802 (SCMR)
GHULAM HYDER — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2021 PLP 1802 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sajjad Ali Shah and Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM HYDER — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2021 PLP 1802 (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 1802 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sajjad Ali Shah 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: 2021 PLP 1802 (SCMR) (GHULAM HYDER — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Taj Muhammad, Advocate Supreme Court and Ms. Abida Parveen Channar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment dated .28.06.2021 passed by the High Court of Sindh in Cr. Bail Application No. S-203 of 2021)
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302(b)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Accused along with four other persons was alleged to have held onto the accused, where after the co-accused fired on the deceased's forehead
Accused was assigned role of a facilitator by holding the deceased alongside four others
Question was whether in the facts and circumstances of the case as alleged by the complainant himself, such facilitation of holding onto the deceased was at all required, that too, without incurring fatal risk of being unintendedly hit by the shot fired by the co-accused in the darkness
As such accused's culpability required further probe within the contemplation of subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and accused was granted bail. Hussain Khan Baloch, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh along with Syed Jafar Shah, DSP Tando, Allah Yar, Javed Iqbal, SI and Idrees, SI for the State.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
The petitioner is in the array of accused in a case of homicide wherein one Niaz Ali was shot dead during the night of 11th December, 2020 within the precincts of Police Station B. Section Tando Allah Yar Khan. It is alleged that during the fateful night, the accused six in number, in the backdrop of a dispute over water turn, assaulted the deceased; solitary fatal shot is attributed to Azhar co-accused; remainder of the accused are blamed to have clutched the deceased whereafter he was hit on his forehead, bullet exiting from the rear. The petitioner has been declined bail lastly by the High Court vide impugned order dated 28.6.2021, leave to appeal wherefrom is being prayed for on the grounds that on stated facts the accusation called for further probe inasmuch as five persons could not have held the deceased without risking their own safety in the face of an incoming shot nor there was any necessity for such a dangerous exercise when, according to the prosecution itself, the deceased was allegedly within the reach of the accused targeting him from a short distance. The bottom line is that a wider net is cast to rope the entire clan in a midnight affair.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Be that as it may, though named in the crime report alongside others of the same brotherhood, the petitioner is assigned role of a facilitator by holding the deceased alongside four others; the question is as to whether in the facts and circumstances of the case as alleged by the complainant himself, such facilitation was at all required, that too, without incurring fatal risk of being unintendedly hit by the shot in the darkness and as such petitioner's culpability requires further probe within the contemplation of subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, paving way for his release on bail, particularly when his continuous detention is serving no useful purpose. The petition is converted into appeal and allowed; the appellant is admitted to bail on his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. MWA/G-27/SC Bail granted.