Mujeeb Khan vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 192 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.

Mujeeb Khan VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b), 324 & 34---Juvenile Justice System Act (XXII of 2018), S.6(5)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, common intention---Bail, dismissal of---Accused a juvenile at the time of commission of offence but an adult at the time of his arrest---Allegations against the accused-petitioner were that he along with others committed murder of complainant, her husband, son and his sister by firing---Perusal of record would transpire that accused petitioner had been directly charged in the FIR by complainant for attempting at her life as well as committing the murder of her husband, her son and his sister---According to narration of complainant, they had gone to the house of accused petitioner for asking the hand of his sister and the occurrence had taken place inside the house of accused petitioner---Report lodged by the complainant was in shape of dying declaration as the record suggested that later that day, she succumbed to her injuries---Medical evidence in shape of postmortem reports of all the four deceased(s) supported the prosecution version---Recovery of blood, blood stained garments of deceased and empties of different bore from the spot further supplemented the prosecution case---After the commission of the offence, accused petitioner went into hiding and remained fugitive from law for 17/18 years---Such long unexplained abscondance spoke volume of guilty conscience of accused petitioner and thus, he lost some of his normal rights to seek bail---Accused petitioner, after his arrest had made pointation of the place of occurrence---Thus on merits, tentative assessment of the available record prima facie connected the accused petitioner with the commission of offence carrying punishment falling within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C disentitling him to concession of bail---Allegedly, accused petitioner was a juvenile at the time of occurrence, as such he was to be treated according to the provisions of Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018---He had been behind the bars for a period exceeding the stipulated time provided in the said Act for release of a juvenile accused on bail in case his trial was not concluded within the stipulated period---Accused petitioner at the time of occurrence might have been a juvenile, however, it was also a fact that after commission of the offence he went into hiding---No doubt, the provisions of the Act ibid provide for grant of bail to an accused person below the age of 18 years and also for release of such accused if his trial was not concluded within the time provided by the law, however, accused petitioner at the time of arrest was no more a juvenile---If the accused petitioner was arrested right after the commission of offence or at the age below 18 years, then the case would have been different---Thus, at this stage, the case of accused petitioner could not be considered under the provisions of Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018 for the purpose of bail---Trial of the accused petitioner had commenced and the proceedings were in progress---Bail application was dismissed, in circumstances.

Mujeeb Khan vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 192 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ