Syed Safeer Hussain vs State Ss — 2025 MLD 194 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

Syed Safeer Hussain VS State Ss. 497 & 498---Bail---Tentative assessment---Scope---Observations made in bail orders are purely tentative in nature, and should in no way prejudice an independent mind of Trial Court which needed to appraise the evidence strictly in accordance with law and merits of the case. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 194 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed Safeer Hussain VS State S. 497---Bail---Call Data Record (CDR)---Scope---Call Data Record is not a conclusive piece of evidence to ascertain the guilt or otherwise of an accused. Citation Name: 2025 MLD 194 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Syed Safeer Hussain VS State S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 109 & 34---Qatl-i-amd, abetment, common intention---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Petitioner was charged for committing murder of the cousin of complainant---Record would show that initially nobody was charged in the FIR---However, subsequently the present accused/petitioner was arrested on the 6th day of occurrence and on the same day, the complainant recorded statement under S.164, Cr.P.C, whereby the present accused/petitioner had been nominated on the ground that since during the police investigation, the present accused/petitioner had been found connected with the commission of offence on the basis of Call Data Record (CDR), and the present accused/petitioner had allegedly been shown in contact with the deceased along with co-accused who was the wife of the deceased---Said female was also implicated in the case as an accused on the basis of same Call Data Record (CDR), however, in her case the Trial Court had granted her bail holding that the legal worth of the Call Data Record (CDR) was to be determined by the Trial Court after recording of the pro and contra evidence, but, benefit of the said ground had been refused to the present petitioner---Even otherwise, in the given facts and circumstances whether the mobile which was allegedly in the ownership of the deceased and whether the mobile which was shown in ownership of the present accused/petitioner were in fact in their ownership or not and as to what was the alleged conversation between the accused and the deceased were questions which were to be determined by the Trial Court after recording of the pro and contra evidence and thus for the time being case of the present accused/petitioner was one of further inquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Even otherwise, challan in the case had already been put in Court, therefore, further custody of the accused/petitioner was neither required by the prosecution nor the same would serve any useful purpose---Bail petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Syed Safeer Hussain vs State Ss — 2025 MLD 194 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD