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

MUHAMMAD SHAHZAD vs State S — 2022 YLRN 111 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 YLRN 111 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Parties
MUHAMMAD SHAHZAD vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 497---P; S. 337-J; Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

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

MUHAMMAD SHAHZAD VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 269, 273, 337-J & 34---Negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life, sale of noxious food or drink, causing hurt by mean of a poison, common intention ---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Alleged recovery of 27 puries of Rajni and 05 puries of one-to-one---No private witness had been associated by the complainant party in spite of prior spy information received during patrolling---Delay in sending the representative part for chemical examination also required an explanation---Whole case of the prosecution being based upon the evidence of police officials, no possibility of tampering the same at the hands of accused persons existed---No doubt the evidence of police officials was as good as private persons, but when whole case was based upon evidence of police officials, their evidence was required to be minutely scrutinized at the time of trial whether the alleged incident had taken place in the manner as stated in FIR or otherwise---Sections 269 & 273, P.P.C. were bailable but S.337-J, P.P.C. was not bailable, however, alleged hazardous/poisonous substance was not administered to anybody at hands of the accused persons---No complaint of local people was on record to show that accused persons were selling hazardous material and to whom the material was sold---Accused persons had been in continuous custody since their arrest and were no more required for any purpose of investigation nor the prosecution had claimed any exceptional circumstance, which could justify keeping them behind the bars for an indefinite period---Accused persons were previously not involved in same nature of cases---No word of Gutka/Mawa allegedly sold by accused persons appeared in FIR---Keeping in view the peculiar facts of the case as well as minimum punishment, which might normally be considered while dealing with bail plea, justice demanded grant of bail to accused.

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