RASHID KHAN And Another vs THE STATE And Other
These criminal petitions arise out of an order passed by the Peshawar High Court regarding the bail applications of two accused persons facing trial under sections 302, 307, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal questions involved the propriety of granting bail to an accused on medical and age grounds and refusing bail to a co-accused attributed with ineffective firing. The Supreme Court held that the High Court exercised its judicial discretion properly without violating any principles of law or committing any illegality. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not interfere with the discretionary exercise of bail jurisdiction by the High Court unless there is a clear illegality or violation of established legal principles.
- Whether ineffective firing by an accused is sufficient ground for further inquiry warranting the grant of bail?
- Whether advanced age and defective vision constitute sufficient grounds for granting bail in a murder case?
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with the High Court's exercise of discretion in granting or refusing bail without a showing of illegality?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA J.--These two petitions are proposed to be disposed of together by this consolidated order as they relate to two accused in the same case. Petitioner Rashid Khan (Criminal petition No. 3-P of 1986) and respondent No.1 Mir Nawaz (Criminal Petition No.4-P of 1986), alongwith Muhammad Nawaz and Lal Nawaz are facing trial under section 302/307/34, P.P.C. For the murder of Akhtar Nawaz son of Nek Nawaz and for attempt on the life of Nek Nawaz and others.
The application for the release of Rashid Khan was dismissed by the Magistrate First Class, Karak, on 16th September, 1985. Similarly Mir Nawaz also applied for bail but his request was also turned down. Both accused then approached the Additional Sessions Judge Karak, for their release but their applications were dismissed.
2. They, therefore, applied for the grant of bail in the Peshawar High Court. The learned Single Judge who heard the bail application of the two accused, after referring Mir Nawaz to the medical board and obtaining their medical opinion came to the conclusion that he was entitled to bail. According to the opinion of the medical board Mir Nawaz was of 70 years of age and had defective vision in his right eye and his left eye vision only extended to perception of light. So far Rashid Khan is concerned, the learned single Judge found that prima facie he was attributed role in the participation of the crime, in that, he had fired at the complainant party although without damage to any one. As a result of these conclusions, the learned single Judge by his order, dated 11th January, 1986 admitted to bail respondent No.1 Mir Nawaz (Criminal Petition No.4-P/1986) and dismissed the application for bail in respect of petitioner Rashid Khan (Criminal Petition No.3- P/1986).
3. Petitioner Rashid Khan has brought this petition for leave to appeal from the order of the High Court for his release on bail and complainant Nek Nawaz has brought petition for leave to appeal to challenge the order of the High Court granting bail to respondent Mir Nawaz.
4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners and examined the order passed by the High Court ands subordinate Courts. The main ground urged on behalf of Rashid Khan by his learned counsel is that he has been attributed ineffective firing and, therefore, his is a case of further inquiry. As regards Mir Nawaz a has been urged on behalf of the complainant that mere old age is n ground for grant of bail.
5. After hearing the learned counsel at length, we find no force in the argument of either side. The High Court in the exercise of its discretion has not violated any principles of law or committed any other illegality. We find no justification to interfere with the order of the High Court and refuse leave in both petitions.
Cited by 3 cases
- ASHFAO AHMED vs HAROON ABBAS and 2 others 1991 MLD 1428
- Mst. BABOO JANA vs THE STATE 1990 P Cr. L J 326
- MUHAMMAD ANWAR KHAN AND 2 OTHERS Versus THE STATE 1988 PCRLJ 304