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

RAZA MUHAMMAD vs State Ss — 2024 YLR 359 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2024 YLR 359 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2024
Reporter
YLR
Parties
RAZA MUHAMMAD vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 173; S. 497; 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

RAZA MUHAMMAD VS State Ss. 497 & 498---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 109, 148 & 149---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit murder, abetment, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly---Ad-interim pre-arrest bail, confirmation of---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Accused were charged for committing murder of two persons and causing firearm injury to the third person over a dispute of agriculture land--- Admittedly, the Investigating Officer in his enquiry report, exonerated the accused/ petitioners from commission of alleged offence---Accused had been declared innocent during investigation and, therefore, after concluding his investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted his report under S. 173, Cr.P.C., suggesting disposal of the case under cancelled "A" Class and he released the two accused/petitioners under S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.---Opinion/ report of the Investigation Officer did not bind the court in any manner yet, the Courts could tentatively peep into its persuasiveness and vitality for the purpose of grant or refusal of bail to the accused---Opinion of the Investigating Officer could be taken into consideration as a relevant circumstances for a just decision of bail petition and it could be taken into consideration validly while deciding a bail application, provided the same was based upon sound material---Opinion of the Investigating Officer would be relevant at bail stage especially when the finding was with regard to the innocence of accused/petitioners---In such circumstances, the present accused/petitioners had made out a case one of further enquiry as envisaged under subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C.---Hence, the applications were allowed; interim pre-arrest bail granted to two accused was confirmed on the same terms and conditions, while other accused/petitioner was admitted to post-arrest bail.

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR

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