Pakistan Case LawMUHAMMAD RIAZ Versus THE STATE and another
This petition seeks leave to appeal against the dismissal of a petition for cancellation of bail previously granted to the respondent by the Lahore High Court. The core legal question revolves around whether bail should be cancelled when an accused, initially found innocent during multiple police investigations, is subsequently challaned in a later investigation. The Supreme Court held that where senior police officers, including a D.S.P. (Legal) and an S.P., disagreed with the findings of the last investigating officer and the accused was placed in column No. 2 of the challan, there were no sufficient grounds to interfere with the discretionary order of the High Court granting bail. The key principle laid down is that the Supreme Court will not ordinarily interfere with a discretionary order granting bail based on conflicting police investigation reports where the accused's involvement remains debatable.
- Whether bail granted to an accused can be cancelled solely on the ground that a subsequent police investigation found him involved?
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with a discretionary order of the High Court granting bail based on conflicting investigation reports?
- What is the effect of senior police officers disagreeing with the findings of the final investigating officer regarding the innocence of an accused?
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J---Muhammad Riaz petitioner .Seeks leave to appeal from the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court whereby his petition for cancellation of bail allowed to the respondent by the High Court vide order dated 20-6-1993, was dismissed.
2.In an occurrence which took place on 9-2-1993, at 11-00 p.m. Abid alias Goga, brother of Abdur Rashid respondent fired his carbine at Mushtaq hitting him in the chest and neck while the respondent's fire hit him on the right arm and he succumbed to his injuries at the spot.
3.The respondent was admitted to bail on the ground that he was found innocent during investigation by as many as four Police Officers including two officers of the rank of D.S.P. And S.P. The petitioner moved an application for cancellation of bail which was dismissed. Hence this petition.
4.We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that in the last investigation the respondent has been found involved and challaned alongwith his co-accused, therefore, he is no more entitled to enjoy the concession of bail. We have considered the above submissions in the light of material available on the record from which it becomes clear that D.S.P. (Legal) and the S.P. Had disagreed with the findings of the last Investigating Officer and the respondent has been shown in Column No,2 of the challan. In the circumstances we do not consider it a fit case for interference with the discretionary order of the High Court. The petition is dismissed.
Judges on this bench
- Muhammad Rafiq Tarar605 judgments
- Manzoor Hussain Sial807 judgments