Pakistan Case Law
1995 SCMR 1165

Mst. NAVEED ARSHAD vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1995 SCMR 1165
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No,247/L of 1994
Date1994-08-15
Judge(s)Muhammad Rafiq Tarar and Fazal Karim
Authored byMuhammad Rafiq Tarar
ResultLeave granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the refusal of bail by the lower courts in a criminal case. The petitioner, an ailing and aged lady, sought relief on the grounds that the evidence gathered by the investigating agency failed to establish a prima facie connection between her and the alleged offences. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine the validity of these contentions, specifically focusing on whether the material on record sufficiently links the petitioner to the crime, given her age and health condition. Pending the final adjudication of the appeal, the Court ordered that the interim bail previously granted to the petitioner shall continue. The judgment serves as a procedural step in the bail process, affirming the court's role in scrutinizing the sufficiency of evidence at the pre-trial stage for vulnerable categories of accused persons.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does the material collected by the investigating agency prima facie link the accused to the commission of the offence?
  • Should interim bail be continued pending the final adjudication of a leave to appeal petition?
leave to appealinterim bailprima facie evidencecriminal lawbail in non-bailable offences

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J.---Leave to appeal is granted inter alia to consider the contention that the petitioner is an ailing and aged lady and the material collected by the Investigating Agency prima facie does not link her with the commission of offences with which she has been charged.

2. Interim bail to continue.

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.