MASVEER AHMED alias AZIZ AHMED Versus AZHAR ALI
This petition seeks the cancellation of bail granted to respondent No. 1 by the Peshawar High Court in respect of a case registered under sections 324 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question revolves around whether the discretion exercised by the High Court in granting bail warrants interference by the Supreme Court, taking into account the duration of bail and the conduct of the accused. The Supreme Court held that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it would not be appropriate to interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court, particularly as the respondent had remained on bail for over three and a half years without misusing the concession or causing trial delays. Consequently, leave to appeal was declined and the petition dismissed. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will generally not interfere with a High Court's discretion in granting bail where the accused has enjoyed bail for a considerable period without abusing the concession or contributing to trial delays.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court in granting bail after a long lapse of time?
- Does the absence of trial delay attributable to the accused justify maintaining bail?
- Can a petition for bail cancellation be sustained when the accused has not abused the concession of bail?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
QAZI FAEZ ISA, J. Through this petition, petitioner seeks cancellation of bail granted to respondent No. 1 by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar vide judgment dated 16th March, 2015 in case FIR No.567 dated 1st August, 2014 registered for offences under sections 324 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station .Khazana, District Peshawar.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that three persons were nominated for causing injuries to three persons, namely, Masveer, Baseer Ahmed and Musam Khan, therefore, the reasons which prevailed with the learned judge of the High Court in granting bail was not sustainable particularly as different sets of bullet casings were recovered from the crime scene.
3. The learned Additional Advocate General, KPK supports the petition. The learned counsel for respondent No. 1 states that the said respondent has been on bail for over three years and despite submission of challan in the month of November, 2015 the charge has still not been framed. He further states that the delay in the commencement and conclusion of the trial has not been attributed to respondent No. 1 nor to the co-accused Zulfiqar, who was arrested in the month of November, 2015 nor have they abused the concession of bail in any manner. The objective of the present petition, according to the learned counsel, is to pressurize the respondent No. 1 and his family to compromise the criminal case in which the respondent No. l's father was murdered and wherein the father of the petitioner has been nominated as an accused, and who has remained an absconder therein. The petitioner too has become an absconder in another criminal case. He concludes by stating that the co-accused Zulfiqar had also secured bail and the application for cancellation of his bail submitted before the High Court was dismissed in default on 13th April, 2018 and no step taken to resurrect the application nor has the said dismissal order been assailed before this Court.
4. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it would not be appropriate for this Court to interfere with the discretion exercised by the learned High Court particularly as respondent No. 1 has remained on bail for over three and a half years and it is not alleged that he has been responsible for the delay or misused the concession of bail in any manner. Under such circumstances, leave to appeal is declined and, consequently, the petition is dismissed.
5. The learned counsel for respondent No. 1 on his behalf and learned Additional Advocate General, KPK on behalf of the State undertake that no unnecessary adjournments will be sought in the pending trial. The Trial Court should therefore ensure the expeditious disposal of the case which is an old one.
MWA/M-48/SC Petition dismissed.
* Received in 2021