Muhammad Zaman alias Jameel vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 380 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation: 2026 PCrLJ 380 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court: Sindh High Court
Year: 2026
Reporter: PCRLJ
Parties: Muhammad Zaman alias Jameel vs State S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 497---P; S. 6; S. 164; Penal Code (XLV of 1860); Juvenile Justice System Act (XXII of 2018); Juvenile Justice System Act

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

Judgment text as reported

Muhammad Zaman alias Jameel VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.365-B & 511---Juvenile Justice System Act (XXII of 2018), Ss. 6(4) & (5)---Forcible abduction---Punishment for attempting to commit offences punishable with imprisonment for life or for shorter term---Juvenile accused---Statutory delay in conclusion of trial---Plea of heinous offence---Section 6(4) of Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018----Applicability---Post arrest bail, grant of---Applicant qualified for the concession of bail under S. 6(4) and (5) of the Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018 (Act)---Applicant was admittedly 15 years of age at the time of the commission of offence and had been incarcerated for over 06 months---Court of first instance erred in its interpretation of S. 6(4) of the Act and denied the bail application of the applicant on the ground that he was accused of a "heinous offence"---Section 6(4) is applicable only in cases where the juvenile is over 16 years of age, but the applicant at all relevant times did not cross that threshold, thus, the nature of the offence in question was immaterial---Even if there was a doubt pertaining to the interpretation of S. 6(4), the benefit of the same ought to have been given to the applicant---Applicant had also made out acase for bail as no statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C of the victim had been recorded and neither had any other cogent evidence surfaced before High Court disentitling the applicant for the concession of bail---Messages allegedly exchanged between the victim and accused did not decipher as to whether applicant intended to commit the offence and the said adjudication could only be made at trial, thus, incarceration of accused would serve no useful purpose---Petition for grant of post arrest bail was allowed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ

2026 PCrLJ 949 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTMuhammad Hayat VS State Ss. 302(b) & 109---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 133---Qatl-i-amd, abetment---Appreciation of evidence---Cross…
2026 PCrLJ 961 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRAzhar Iqbal VS State. S. 302(b)---Qatl-i-amd---Appreciation of evidence---Accused was charged for committing murder of the wife of complaina…
2026 PCrLJ 389 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSyed Muhammad Kashan Haider VS State. S. 497(1)---azad Penal Code (XLV of 1860),Ss. 302(b), 341 & 34---arms act (XI of 1878), S. 15(2)---Qat…
2026 PCrLJ 93 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSyed Sajjad Hussain Shah VS State. S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substances---Reappraisal of evidence---Prosecution case was that 1080-gr…
2026 PCrLJ 93 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSyed Sajjad Hussain Shah VS State. S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substances---Reappraisal of evidence---Discrepancy in the prosecution ca…
2026 PCrLJ 93 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIRSyed Sajjad Hussain Shah VS State. S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotic substances---Reappraisal of evidence---Safe custody of recovered substan…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English