ABID vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 635 SUPREME-COURT

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

ABID VS STATE. S. 497(2)---Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 457, 380 & 411---Lurking house-trespass or house-breaking by night with the intent to commit an offence, theft committed in a building, tent, or vessel used for human habitation or property storage, dishonest receipt or retention of stolen property---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry. Allegations against the accused-petitioners were that they broke the locks of the complainant's spare parts shop and committed theft of spare parts worth Rs.20,06,000/-. It was an admitted position that no person was implicated in the FIR lodged on 31.08.2024, but after 10 days of its registration, the supplementary statement of the complainant was recorded by the police in which he, for the first time, implicated the present petitioner on the basis of some information received through a supposedly reliable source. However, even the name of his source of information was never disclosed in the supplementary statement or to the police. Thus, the case required further inquiry and unless the trial was conducted and completed, the culpability of the present petitioner could not be proved. Mere statement of the prosecutor that the petitioner was involved in some other similar cases also did not hold water, for the reason that nothing was produced by the Investigating Officer or the prosecutor for consideration to that end. Prosecution had to demonstrate that it was in possession of sufficient material/evidence constituting reasonable grounds that an accused had committed an offence falling within the prohibitory limb of Section 497, Cr.P.C., while for attaining bail, the accused had to show that the evidence/material collected by the prosecution and/or the defence plea taken by him created reasonable doubt/suspicion in the prosecution case and he was entitled to the benefit of bail. Basic idea was to enable the accused to answer the criminal prosecution against him, rather than keeping him behind bars. Petition was converted into appeal and allowed and the petitioners were allowed post-arrest bail, in circumstances.

ABID vs STATE — 2026 SCMR 635 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR