Ashraf Din vs Ikramullah S — 2024 MLD 1867 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

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

Ashraf Din VS Ikramullah S. 497(5)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b), 324, 114 & 109---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, abettor present at the time of offence, abetment---Petition for cancellation of bail, dismissal of---Tentative assessment of the record showed that the name of the accused was nowhere found in the contents of FIR and neither was the abettor nor instigator---No single evidence was available on record to connect the accused with the alleged offence---Neither the accused was directly nominated in the FIR nor any specific role or injury was attributed to the accused and admittedly no weapon of offence had been recovered from his custody during the course of investigation---Investigating Officer of the case had found that accused was merely present at the scene of crime at the relevant time and that he was neither armed nor he had caused any injury to any person---Thus, it appeared that the petitioner had implicated the accused in the case on account of relationship of accused with the deceased and the principal accused---Accused was not present at the time and place of alleged occurrence and insertion of Ss.109/114, P.P.C was meant to drag the accused with mala fide intention in the litigation---Tentative assessment prime facie did not establish the involvement of accused in the commission of offence in furtherance of common intention---Complainant had failed to point out that the bail granting order was patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect, perverse and that the accused had misused the privilege of bail---Only accusation/allegation leveled against the present accused was his alleged presence near the scene of occurrence at the time of alleged occurrence---Mere presence of accused near the venue of occurrence at the relevant time without attribution of any role in connection of the alleged occurrence was not a convincing and appealable ground for cancellation of bail---Furthermore, the cancellation of bail is a harsh order because it interferes with the liberty of an individual---In the present case none of the grounds for cancellation of bail were attracted---Bail cancellation petition filed by the complainant being bereft of any merit was dismissed, in circumstances.

Ashraf Din vs Ikramullah S — 2024 MLD 1867 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD