Syed Muhammad vs State S — 2025 YLR 339 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.

Syed Muhammad VS State S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Rule of consistency---Accused were charged for committing murder of the nephew of complainant by firing---As per record, three accused were charged for the occurrence with the allegation that the accused/ applicant along with acquitted accused and co-accused (on bail) made firing upon the deceased and effective role was attributed to all the accused persons---Record revealed that after facing trial the co-accused was acquitted from the charge by the Trial Court on 30.03.2024 and subsequently the co-accused was arrested and was enlarged on bail by the trial Court on 29.06.2024---All the accused were ascribed similar role---Rule of consistency, or in other words, the doctrine of parity in criminal cases, including bail matters, recapitulated that where the incriminating and ascribed role to the accused was one and the same as that of the co-accused then the benefit extended to one accused should be extended to the co-accused also on the principle that like cases should be treated alike, but after accurate evaluation and assessment of the co-offenders' role in the commission of the alleged offence---In the case in hand all the accused persons nominated in the FIR were attributed the same role that they made firing upon the deceased who received injuries, however, one of the accused persons was acquitted from the charge after being given benefit of doubt by the trial Court and the other accused had been granted bail by the Trial Court---After tentative assessment, the applicant had not only made out a case of further inquiry but he was also entitled to be enlarged on bail in view of the rule of consistency---Prosecution alleged that the accused/applicant remained absconder after the incident as such he was not entitled to bail, however an applicant could be granted bail if the applicant otherwise made out the case on merits and mere absconsion would not come in his way---Custody of the applicant would not advance the case of the prosecution in any manner---Bail petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Syed Muhammad vs State S — 2025 YLR 339 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR