Abdul Malik vs State S — 2025 YLR 1029 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

Abdul Malik VS State S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Accused was charged that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the two uncles of complainant--- Perusal of record revealed that though the applicant (accused) was nominated in the FIR, but the fact remained that no role of firing upon the deceased persons was attributed to him---According to own case of the prosecution the absconding accused made firing upon the deceased persons, while only role of giving cover to the main accused persons was attributed to the applicant (accused)---First Information Report was also silent about whether at the relevant time the applicant (accused) was present at the site in armed condition or he was empty handed---Mere presence of an accused at the time of commission of crime was not enough to hold him responsible for commission of crime unless the prosecution succeeded in establishing that the applicant (accused) had also shared common intention or common object with his co-accomplices or helped or facilitated them in the crime---Being empty handed, the applicant (accused) could lend no help to his co-accused, rather he might have put himself in danger of being harmed by the other side, had there been any retaliation or counter-attack by them---Applicant (accused) was involved in the crime and in order to save his skin from legal consequences, he remained fugitive from law---However, bail could be granted, if the accused had good prima-facie case for bail on merits and mere absconsion would not come in the way of granting him bail---Question of what role had been played in the commission of crime would be ascertained after recording evidence from both the sides---Status of statements under S.161, Cr.P.C., recorded by the witnesses after considerable long delay, would also be determined at the time of delivering of final judgment, till then the case of the applicant fell within the ambit of further inquiry and he had succeeded in making out a case for grant of bail in his favour---Bail application was allowed, in circumstances.

Abdul Malik vs State S — 2025 YLR 1029 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR