MUHAMMAD ATIF vs State S — 2024 SCMR 1071 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.

MUHAMMAD ATIF VS State S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 148 & 149---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Qatl-i-amd, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Bail, refusal of---Rule of consistency not applicable---Courts below have granted the post-arrest bail to the two co-accused persons under Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. after making a tentative assessment of the evidence collected in the investigation both for and against them---Tentative assessment of that evidence has led them to the finding that there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the said co-accused have committed the offence of murder of the complainant's son, but rather there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into their guilt---Material collected in the investigation in the case of two co-accused shows that they were not present on the scene of the crime---This is not so in the case of the petitioner/accused---Therefore, material collected in the investigation against the present petitioner is different from that collected against them---Ground on which they have been granted bail is not available to the petitioner---Case against the petitioner is therefore not at par with that against those co-accused persons but rather is distinguishable in a substantial aspect---Allegation made against the petitioner of being present on the spot and having made fires on the deceased sons of the complainant by his firearm is not only supported by the statements of the eye-witnesses but also corroborated by the recovery of the weapon of offence effected from him in the investigation---There is, as such, sufficient incriminating material available on the record of the case to connect the petitioner with the commission of the alleged offence, and his case does not come within the scope of the provisions of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C., nor does the rule of consistency apply to him---High Court had righty refused post-arrest bail to the petitioner---Petition for leave to leave was dismissed, leave was refused and petitioner was refused bail. Your Search returned total 35531 records from 9600 - 9650

MUHAMMAD ATIF vs State S — 2024 SCMR 1071 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR