MUHAMMAD KHAN vs MAHMOOD SHAH And Other
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the order of the Lahore High Court upholding the grant of bail to the respondents. The core legal question concerns the propriety of interfering with the concurrent exercise of judicial discretion by the courts below in granting bail to persons charged under sections 302, 307, 149, 148, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The Supreme Court held that since both the lower courts properly exercised their discretion in allowing bail to the respondents, no sufficient ground existed to interfere with the impugned order. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed, reinforcing the principle that appellate courts are reluctant to interfere with concurrent discretionary orders granting bail unless perversity or grave illegality is shown.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with the concurrent exercise of discretion by lower courts in granting bail?
- Can a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of a bail cancellation application be maintained without showing compelling grounds of misuse of discretion?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, dated 5-11-1986, whereby the petition of Muhammad Khan petitioner for cancellation of bail was dismissed.
2. In the above case, nine persons including the four respondents are charged under sections 302/307/149 and 148 read with section 109, P.P. C. For committing the murder of one Zulfiqar and injuries to four persons. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 28-6-1986 at 5 a.m. In the area of Chak No. 401/G.B., Police Station Tandlianwala, District Faisalabad. The four respondents were allowed bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, on 16-10-1986 on the grounds written in his order. The petitioner's application for cancellation of the bail of the four respondents was dismissed by the Hiah Court through the impugned order.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the caveator and have gone through the orders of the Courts below. Since both the Courts have exercised their discretion in allowing bail to the respondents, we do not find any ground to interfere with the same. The petition is dismissed.