SADIQ ALI SHAH vs SARDAR KHALID UMAR AND Other
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the order of the High Court dated 9-2-1982, whereby bail was granted to respondent Sardar Khalid Umar in a case registered under sections 302, 307, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The petitioner contended that the respondent was involved as an abettor in the commission of murder. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court properly exercised its discretion in granting post-arrest bail to the accused on medical grounds. The Supreme Court held that the grant of bail was well within the discretion of the High Court, supported by sufficient medical material demonstrating that the respondent was a heart patient whose detention would severely affect his health. The Court laid down the principle that where medical grounds are substantiated by competent medical authority indicating grave risk to the accused's health, and no legal principle governing bail has been violated, the Supreme Court will not interfere with the High Court's exercise of discretion to grant bail.
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused on medical grounds when he is suffering from a serious ailment such as a heart condition?
- Will the Supreme Court interfere with the High Court's order granting bail if no principle of law governing the grant of bail has been violated?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
M. S. H. QURESHI, J.-The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of theHigh Court dated 9-2-1982 allowing bail to respondent Sardar Khalid Umar in a case under section 302/307/109, P. P. C. No part in the occurrence was attributed to the respondent but it was alleged that the murder had been committed at the instance of the said respondent and some others.
2. The main consideration, however, for the grant of bail was medical, the respondent being a heart patient. There is enough material, as discussed in the order of the High Court, to show that the respondent had been suffering from such ailment for some time. There is even a certificate from an Assistant Professor of Cardiology, King Edward Medical College, Lahore, to the effect that "this detention will severely affect his health particularly when he is already aged 55 years". 1n the circumstance, the grant of bail was well within the discretion of the High Court. There is no violation of any principle of law governing the grant of bail such as would justify an interference by this Court. The petition for grant of leave to appeal is, therefore, rejected.
Cited by 4 cases
- ZESHAN SARWAR and another vs THE STATE 2005 YLR 609
- BAHADUR KHAN Versus THE STATE 2004 PCRLJ 114
- MUHAMMAD IQBAL Versus STATE 1999 PCRLJ 133
- MUHAMMAD BASHIR vs THE STATE- 1987 P C r. L J 230