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

SALMAN KHAN vs State S — 2024 MLD 392 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation
2024 MLD 392 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court
Peshawar High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
MLD
Parties
SALMAN KHAN vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 497; S. 53---U; Penal Code (XLV of 1860); Welfare Act (XIII of 2010); Criminal Procedure Code

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

SALMAN KHAN VS State S. 497, third and fourth provisos---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 377 & 506---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Child Protection and Welfare Act (XIII of 2010), S. 53---Unnatural offences and criminal intimidation if threat be to cause death or grievous hurt etc.---Bail, refusal of---Statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial---Contributory delay---Gravity of the act alleged---Scope---Although the delay in conclusion of trial was floating on the surface of the record, however, it had to be determined that delay-in-question was, prima facie, willful and deliberate and could only be attributed to the prosecution or the same was a contributory delay in which the defence was equally responsible to delay the conclusion of the event followed by its adjudication on its merits---Record revealed that there was a contributory delay, in conclusion of trial, either on the part of the petitioner/accused, prosecution, or otherwise due to the strikes etc.---Even the trial had been adjourned, for considerable number of dates of hearing, on the Reader-Note for the want of Presiding Officer---Periods of contribution in delay-in-question could not be attributed to a single functionary of the Court i.e prosecution or defence or otherwise, rather it was a contributory delay, on which score alone, it would be un-wise that, while holding the prosecution responsible, the petitioner/accused be allowed a walk-over or a chance to encash the delay and not to shoulder the responsibility of the contributory delay---Petitioner/accused had allegedly been charged for committing unnatural act with a minor/victim---Fourth proviso of S. 497 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 was fully attracted in petitioner's case, therefore, he could not be extended the benefit of third proviso of S. 497 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898---Bail was declined to the petitioner/accused, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2024 MLD

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