MUhammad Hammad vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 401 ISLAMABAD

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

MUhammad Hammad VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 336-B--Causing itlaf-salahiyyat-i-udw---Bail, refusal of---Allegation against the accused-petitioner was that he threw acid at the complainant, which splashed onto her right arm, causing serious burns, while some of it also fell on her younger sister's face---Record reflected that the petitioner was specifically nominated in the FIR with a clear and defined role, wherein it was alleged that he threw acid upon the complainant and her sister, resulting in burn injuries---First Information Report was lodged promptly, without any delay, which lent credence to the prosecution's version and negated the possibility of afterthought or deliberation---Medical report issued by hospital confirmed that the injuries sustained by the complainant and her sister were caused by a corrosive substance, thereby corroborating the ocular account---Furthermore, the empty acid bottle allegedly used in the commission of offence was produced by the complainant and the Naqsha-e-Mazroobi was prepared by the Investigating Officer immediately after the occurrence which also corroborated and lent further support to the complainant's version---Offence fell within the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C. and was non-bailable in nature---Such like heinous offences involving violence, particularly where the victim had sustained serious burn injuries, the grant of bail was an exception and could only be considered where the prosecution's case appeared inherently doubtful or lacked prima facie corroboration, but such circumstances were not evident in the present case---At this stage, the available evidence, including medical corroboration and recovery of the acid container, sufficiently connected the petitioner with the alleged offence---Contention of the defense regarding non-availability of forensic report or independent witnesses did not, at this preliminary stage, discredit the otherwise consistent ocular and medical evidence, which could only be properly appreciated after recording of evidence at trial---Submission that the case was fabricated due to matrimonial discord also appeared to be adefense plea, which could not be conclusively determined at the bail stage---Petition for bail was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUhammad Hammad vs State S — 2026 PCrLJ 401 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ