ZARAM KHAN vs STATE S — 2026 YLR 186 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.

ZARAM KHAN VS STATE S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Bail, grant of---Plea of alibi plausible--- Allegations against the accused-petitioner was that he along with his co-accused committed murder of the brother of complainant by firing--- In the present case, the petitioner raised a robust plea of alibi, contending that at the precise date and time of the alleged occurrence, he was not present at the scene of the crime--- In support of his alibi, the petitioner furnished a comprehensive set of documentary and electronic evidence to substantiate his presence--- Said evidence included, but was not limited to, the following: (1) Mobile phone location data, which tracked his movements and confirmed his presence in S-(Swat); (2) Entry records from the Check Post, which documented his vehicle's passage through the area; (3) CCTV footage and photographs obtained from a Guest House, capturing his presence at the premises; and (4) The guest register of the Guest House, which contained a verifiable entry of his stay along with CCTV video from the office of DPO, regarding his presence--- Such pieces of evidence collectively formed a compelling case for the petitioner's absence from the scene of the alleged offence--- Investigation Officer, acting diligently, collected and scrutinized the said evidence--- To ensure its authenticity, the materials were subjected to forensic analysis by the Forensic Science Agency--- Forensic examination yielded a critical finding that no traces of editing, tampering, or manipulation were detected in the submitted evidence, thereby lending significant credibility to the petitioner's claims--- Verified evidence strongly supported the petitioner's contention that he was not present at the location where the offence allegedly occurred, casting substantial doubt on the prosecution's narrative--- Given the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it was evident that the petitioner's culpability could not be conclusively determined at this stage--- Even otherwise, the challan in the case was almost complete and thus further custody of the accused/petitioner was neither required to the prosecution nor the same would serve any useful purpose--- Accused/petitioner had made out a case for the grant of bail, in circumstances--- Bail application was allowed, in circumstances.

ZARAM KHAN vs STATE S — 2026 YLR 186 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR