Pakistan Case Law
2005 PCrLJ 2003

JAMIL KHAN Versus THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2005 PCrLJ 2003
CourtPeshawar High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Petition No.768 of 2005
Judge(s)Ejaz Afzal Khan, T JAMIL KHAN--
Authored byEjaz Afzal Khan
ResultBail granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter comes before the Peshawar High Court through a bail petition filed by Jamil Khan, who was charged under sections 324 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 in FIR No. 303 dated 25-6-2005 at Police Station Naurang. The core legal question revolves around whether the prosecution's version of events—specifically that a person was caught while being fired at—is prima facie believable for the purpose of withholding post-arrest bail. The court held that the prosecution story prima facie appears unbelievable, as no reasonable person would expose themselves to the risk of being hit by catching someone being fired at, thereby making out a case for further inquiry. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and directed the release of the petitioner on bail, laying down the principle that inherently improbable prosecution narratives at the bail stage warrant the concession of bail.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is the story of catching hold of a person being fired at prima facie believable for refusing bail?
  • Whether a case for further inquiry is made out when the prosecution narrative appears inherently improbable?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
post-arrest bailattempt to murderfurther inquirycriminal procedurebail petition

EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, J.--- Jamil Khan, petitioner herein, who is charged in a case registered against him under section 324/34, P.P.C., vide F.I.R. No.303 dated 25-6-2005, Police Station Naurang, seeks his release on bail mainly on the ground that the story of catching hold of a person being fired at, is not believable on the face of it and that the learned Additional Sessions Judge has not exercised his discretion judicially by refusing bail.

2. As against that, the learned A.A.-G. does not seriously dispute this proposition.

3. I have gone through the record carefully and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

4. The story of catching hold of a person who is fired at prima facie appears to be unbelievable as no person will expose himself to the risk of being hit by doing so. Therefore, a case for bail is made out.

5. For the reasons discussed above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000 (Rs ten thousand) with one surety to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate.

S.A.K./506/P Bail granted.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.