PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

ROHAN AHMAD vs State Ss — 2022 PCrLJ 259 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation
2022 PCrLJ 259 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court
Lahore High Court
Year
2022
Reporter
PCRLJ
Parties
ROHAN AHMAD vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 11---D; S. 344; S. 497; Penal Code (XLV of 1860); Electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

ROHAN AHMAD VS State Ss. 344 & 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 295-B, 298-C, 120-B, 34 & 109---Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), S. 11---Defiling of the Holy Qur'an, person of Quadiani group calling himself a Muslim preaching and propagating his faith, criminal conspiracy, common intention, abetment and electronic forgery--- Bail, refusal of---Remand of custody---Accused persons were alleged to be of Quadiani faith who were preaching and propagating their faith and were maintaining websites containing books including the holy Quran containing blasphemous content---Validity---Offence was to see apparently committed but for such exercise whole of the documents would be gone through which was the function of Trial Court and that it had already been done---It was to be presumed that judicial act was regularly performed as contemplated under Art. 129(e) of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Provision of S. 344, Cr.P.C. had very close nexus with S. 497, Cr.P.C. and if due to reasonable cause it would become necessary or advisable to postpone commencement of or adjourn an inquiry or trial, the Court could do it from time to time and remand the accused to custody---Explanation attached to said section was very important to understand concept of remanding the accused to custody---Remanding accused to custody was an indicator that sufficient evidence was available on record and there was likely that further evidence would be obtained by a remand---If Court had considered that further evidence was not expected and sufficient evidence so far had not been brought on record, Court in such eventuality could release accused on bail---Offences alleged against accused persons fell within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.---Evidence connecting accused persons with commission of offence was available and case was in trial---Trial Court had already refused to exercise of discretion in favour of accused persons to enlarge them on bail after considering that sufficient evidence was available and remanded them to custody---Bail was declined in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PCRLJ

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English