ZULQARNAIN HAIDER alias Zain vs State S — 2025 SCMR 1457 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.

ZULQARNAIN HAIDER alias Zain VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-H(2), 440, 148 & 149---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, rash or negligent act to endanger human life or personal safety of others, mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry, case of---Cross version---Allegation against the petitioner-accused was that he along with co-accused committed murder of the deceased and caused injuries to the injured witness---Record showed that another report of the same occurrence had been registered by accused, also including the same place, time and date of occurrence, while involving the same parties inter se---However, that second report was registered on 21.05.2023, with a delay of four days---From one side deceased had lost his life and injured sustained injuries while in the second report two persons sustained injuries---When both versions were placed in juxtaposition, it became apparent that the allegations in both complaints were qua the same incident, as they shared a common nexus in terms of date, time, location, motive and parties involved---Apparent distinction laid in the sequence of reporting---Such factual overlap, prima facie, reflected that the two versions were antithetical claims arising out of one and the same occurrence thus, portraying the current scenario as cross version---Supreme Court observed that it was not in agreement with the High Court on not allowing bail to the petitioner on the basis of cross-version---In cases involving cross-versions of the same occurrence, the prime consideration before the Court is to ascertain which party is the aggressor and which party is aggressed upon---Nature, seat, and number of injuries sustained by each side may undoubtedly be relevant; however, such factors are merely indicative and do not, by themselves, carry an overriding or conclusive effect---Mere extent of injuries caused to one party could not serve as the sole basis for drawing an adverse inference against the other, especially where both versions emanated from the same transaction and each party attributed aggression to the other---In cases of counter versions arising from the same incident, one given by the complainant in the FIR, and the other given by the opposite party, bail in appropriate cases is granted as a rule on the grounds of further inquiry for the reason that the question as to which version is correct is to be decided after the recording of pro and contra evidence during the trial---Refusal of bail in such cases is an exception---Additionally, the petitioner was in custody for the last 23 months and despite the lapse of such a considerable period, there appeared to be no substantial progress in the trial pending before the Trial Court---Such prolonged incarceration, without meaningful advancement in the trial, raised a serious concern regarding the petitioner's right to a fair and expeditious trial---Petition was converted into appeal and was allowed, in circumstances, and petitioner was granted bail.

ZULQARNAIN HAIDER alias Zain vs State S — 2025 SCMR 1457 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 SCMR