Pakistan Case Law
1984 SCMR 521

AMIR ALI AND OTHERS vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1984 SCMR 521
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Appeal No, 137 of 1983
Date1983-10-07
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain and Nasim Hasan Shah
Authored byAslam Riaz Hussain
ResultBail granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Amir Ali, Mokha, and Mohabat against the refusal of pre-trial bail by the High Court. The petitioners were accused under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of Jamat Ali. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail when the investigating officer, an Assistant Superintendent of Police, concluded after examining numerous witnesses that the petitioners were not present at the scene of the occurrence. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and held that the finding of the investigating officer was based on sufficient material, thereby creating a reasonable doubt regarding the participation of the petitioners that warranted the grant of bail at this stage. The Court laid down the principle that the benefit of an investigating officer's reasoned opinion regarding the non-participation or absence of an accused at the crime scene can be extended to grant bail to the accused.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether an accused is entitled to bail when the investigating officer's report concludes that the accused was not present at the scene of the occurrence?
  • Can the benefit of doubt arising from an investigating officer's report be extended to an accused at the bail stage?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
criminal bailmurderbenefit of doubtinvestigation reportsupreme court of pakistanleave to appeal

ORDER

' ASLAM Rua HUSSAIN, J.-Amir Ali, Mokha and Mohabat petitioners are accused alongwith some others inter alia, under section 302, P. P. C. For the murder of Jamat Ali. They applied for bail before the High Court and urged inter alia, that the A. S. P. Who had investigated the case had found that the 3 petitioners were not present at the scene of the occurrence. Their co-accused were granted bail but their application was refused by the High Court.

' Feeling aggrieved they filed the present petition for leave to appeal.

2. We issued notice to the State. Mr. Tanvir Ahmad Khan, A. A.-G. Appearing for the State urged before us that the A. S. P. Who investigated the case had found, after examining a large number of witnesses in the village, that the three petitioners were not present at the spot. He read out the relevant portions of the A. S. P's. Report to us.

3. We, therefore, convert this petition into appeal and proceed to dispose it of as such.

4. We feel that in this case the view expressed by the A. S. P., that the petitioners were not present at the spot, is based on sufficient material. As such we are of the view that in this case the benefit of doubt arising from the A. S. P's. Report must go to the petitioners even at the bail stage. They are, therefore, granted bail in the sum of Rs, 30,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Jaranwala. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.

Cited by 23 cases

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