Badar Uddin vs State S — 2026 MLD 169 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

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

Badar Uddin VS State S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324 & 109---Explosive Substances Act (VI of 1908), S. 6---Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, abetment, possession of explosive substance---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Allegations against the petitioner-accused were that he along with his co-accused attempted to commit murder of complainant by opening fires from outside of house of the complainant and one bullet hit the complainant---From perusal of record it transpired that the complainant had nominated the present petitioner/accused and his co-accused on the basis of suspicion claiming that he had old enmity with the co-accused of the present petitioner and the present petitioner and his father were relative of the other accused, therefore, the present petitioner and his co-accused might have opened fire on him---Neither any eye-witness nor the complainant himself witnessed/saw the accused/petitioner and his co-accused at the place of occurrence---No specific role had been attributed to the accused/petitioner in the FIR and no incriminating material/weapon of offence had been recovered from the present petitioner/accused by the police during investigation of the case---Petitioner/accused was confined in judicial custody since the day of his arrest and police had submitted challan against him in the Court of competent jurisdiction, hence, the petitioner was not required for further investigation---Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, prima facie case against the petitioner/accused required further inquiry as contemplated under subsection.(2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Moreover, three other nominated co-accused of the petitioner/accused had been discharged under S.169, Cr.P.C., by the police---One co-accused had been released on bail by High Court, hence, rule of consistency applied to the case of the present petitioner/accused and he was entitled for concession of post arrest bail---Bail petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Badar Uddin vs State S — 2026 MLD 169 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD