MUNIR AHMAD and anothers vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the refusal of the High Court to grant bail to the petitioners in a criminal case. The core legal question presented for the Supreme Court's consideration is whether, based on the specific facts and circumstances of the case, there existed reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioners were guilty of an offence falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Furthermore, the Court must determine whether the High Court exercised its discretion legally and correctly in denying the concession of bail to the petitioners. The judgment serves as a preliminary order granting leave to appeal, thereby setting the stage for a substantive review of the bail refusal. The principle established is that the Supreme Court will examine whether the lower court properly applied the criteria for bail under the prohibitory clause, specifically assessing if the evidentiary threshold for denying bail was met given the factual matrix of the case.
- Does the offence charged against the petitioners fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Were there reasonable grounds to believe the petitioners were guilty of the offence charged?
- Did the High Court correctly exercise its discretion in refusing to grant bail to the petitioners?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. FAZAL ILAHI KHAN, J.---Leave is granted to consider whether there were reasonable grounds to believe, on facts and circumstances of the case, that the petitioners are guilty of offence which falls under prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. And that the learned High Court was legally correct in 14 refusing to extend the concession of bail in favor of the petitioners.