MEHRAN vs UBAID ULLAH S — 2024 PLD 843 SUPREME-COURT

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

MEHRAN VS UBAID ULLAH S. 497---Juvenile Justice System act (XXII of 2018), S. 6(5)---Constitution of Pakistan, art. 185(3)---Bail---Juvenile accused---Statutory delay in conclusion of trial---Period of delay in concluding the trial is calculated from the date of the arrest of the accused. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 843 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MEHRAN VS UBAID ULLAH Ss. 2(g), 2(m), 2(o), 6(4) & 6(5)---Juvenile accused---Heinous offence---Bail---Statutory delay in conclusion of trial---Principles---Since both 'minor offence' and 'major offence' are treated as bailable under Section 6(3) of the Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018 ('the 2018 Act'), the ground of delay in the conclusion of the trial provided by Section 6(5) for grant of bail applies solely to juveniles detained for a 'heinous offence'---Therefore, post-arrest bail is to be granted as a matter of right to a juvenile detained for a heinous offence, regardless ofhis age, whether above or below sixteen years, provided the prerequisites of Section 6(5) are fulfilled---Nature of the offence is not a valid ground to withhold bail under Section 6(5) of the 2018 Act. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 843 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MEHRAN VS UBAID ULLAH S. 497---Juvenile Justice System act (XXII of 2018), Ss. 6(5) & 8---Penal Code (XLV of 1860),Ss. 302, 324, 392, 427, 201 & 34---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa arms act (XXIII of 2013), S. 15---Constitution of Pakistan, art. 185(3)---Qatl-i-amd committed during robbery---Bail, grant of---Juvenile accused---Statutory delay in conclusion of trial---Main reasons given by the High Court for the denial of bail to the petitioner (juvenile accused) on the statutory ground of delay in the conclusion of the trial were (i) that the petitioner committed a 'heinous offence'; (ii) that the delay in the conclusion of the trial was attributable to the petitioner, as he had moved an application for the determination of his age under Section 8 of the Juvenile Justice System act, 2018 ("2018 act"), which took time; and (iii) the frequent absence of the co-accused during the trial also contributed to the delay---Validity---High Court erred in law by attributing the delay in concluding the trial to the petitioner, who had filed an application for determination of his age under Section 8 of the 2018 act, which took time---Initial duty to determine the age of an accused who appeared or claimed to be a juvenile laid with the police---When the police fails in this duty, it passes on to the court---Therefore, the time spent by the court in making this determination constitutes an act of the court, which cannot be construed as delay caused by the petitioner in the trial, thereby depriving him of his right to bail on the statutory ground of delay---So far as the delay caused by the frequent absence of the co-accused during trial was concerned, the same could not be attributed to the petitioner as one was responsible for his own acts or omissions, not of others---Petitioner was arrested in the present case on 23 February 2023 and had been detained continuously for more than six months since then, with his trial not yet concluded---There was no evidence on record indicating that the delay in concluding the trial was caused by any act or omission of the petitioner---Therefore, the prerequisites of Section 6(5) of the 2018 act were fulfilled, which entitled the petitioner to the grant of post-arrest bail as a matter of right on the statutory ground of delay in the conclusion of the trial---Petition was converted into an appeal and the same was allowed, the impugned judgment was set aside, and the petitioner was admitted to bail. Citation Name: 2024 PLD 843 SUPREME-COURTBookmark this Case MEHRAN VS UBAID ULLAH Preamble---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 35---United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), Art. 3---Juvenile justice system---Child justice---Therapeutic jurisprudence---Purpose and objective of the juvenile justice system explained.

MEHRAN vs UBAID ULLAH S — 2024 PLD 843 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PLD