MUHAMMAD RASHID vs ZAIDULLAH and another
This appeal arises from a criminal matter where the Shariat Court granted post-arrest bail to the respondent, Zaidullah, who was facing trial for murder under the Penal Code. The appellant, the first informant, challenged this decision, arguing that the medical certificate supporting the respondent's illness was unsubstantiated, lacked underlying diagnostic records, and was potentially manipulated. The core legal question was whether the Shariat Court exercised its discretion arbitrarily in granting bail based on the medical evidence presented. The Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir held that the medical certificate issued by the official Medical Officer, which diagnosed the respondent with unstable angina and heart failure, was credible. The Court observed that the certificate was based on official hospital records, including E.C.G. and X-ray results, and there was no evidence to rebut the presumption of truth attached to the official medical report. Consequently, the Court affirmed that the discretion exercised by the Shariat Court was sound and based on the record, dismissing the appeal and upholding the grant of bail on medical grounds.
- Can a court grant post-arrest bail to an accused person based on a medical certificate issued by an official doctor?
- Does a medical certificate issued by an official medical officer carry a presumption of truth in bail proceedings?
- Under what circumstances can an appellate court interfere with the discretion exercised by a lower court in granting bail?
- Section 302, Penal Code
' BASHARAT AHMAD SHAIKH, J.---Respondent Zaidullah is one of the accused persons who are facing trial under section 302 of the Penal Code read with some other sections of the said Code.
They applied for bail before the trial .Court but their bail application was rejected. Respondent Zaidullah as well as accused persons Mehboob, Khizar Hayat, Zafar, and Naeem (not before the Court) filed a revision petition before the Shariat Court. The Shariat Court has enlarged Zaidullah on bail while rest of accused persons have been refused this concession. Bail has been granted to Zaidullah on the basis of his illness. The order passed by the Shariat Court has been challenged by first informant Muhammad Rashid by filing this appeal as of right. Respondent Zaidullah was admitted in District Headquarters Hospital and under directions of the trial Court the following certificate about his health was submitted: "4-6-1999 Admitted in D.H.Q. Hospital, Kotli on 26-5-1999 with M/O severe pain chest left side. +dysponca ' He is a known case of I.H.D. As his old record since 1992 and is under treatment of General Muhammad Zulfiqar Ali Khan, Cardiologist, Armed Forces Institute of Cardiology, Rawalpindi. He is non-diabetic. He had E.T.T. In past which is positive for stress test. ---Present E.C.G. Shows - left vendriculent Hypethropy with S.T.T. Segment change and Multiple Ectopries.
' X-rays shows cardiac enlargement with failure.' --- He is diagnosed as a case of unstable Angina (I.H.D.) with heart failure and is under our treatment.
(Sd.)
(Dr. Sajjad Hussain Malik), M.B., B.S."
2. It was vehemently contended by Mr. Abdul Majid Mallick, the learned counsel for the appellant, that the doctor has described Zaidullah as a known case of heart decease but he has not disclosed the basis on which he gave this finding. He also submitted that there is no record to substantiate the claim that Zaidullah was under-treatment of General Zulfiqar Ali Khan, Cardiologist, Armed Forces Institute of Cardiology, Rawalpindi. It was also contended by him that there is no E,C.G. Or X-ray available in the file and also contended that the doctor did not give the view that the respondent cannot be properly treated in the Jail. Mr. Abdul Majid .Mallick also alleged that the certificate reproduced above had been obtained as a result of manipulation.
3. The learned counsel for respondent Zaidullah, Mr. Sher Zaman Choudri, opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the first information and submitted that Dr.Sajjad Hussain Malik is an official doctor and certificate issued by him carries presumption of truth which could be rebutted by the other party but no such effort was made. He contended that it has to be presumed, that the necessary documents showing that Zaidullah was under-treatment of General Zulfiqar Ali Khan were produced before Dr. Sajjad Hussain Malik. It was further contended by the learned counsel that the certificate given by Medical Officer showed that E.C.G. Was conducted in District Headquarters Hospital, Kotli and its result is also mentioned therein. The learned counsel drew our attention to the fact that it is mentioned in the certificate that petitioner's X-ray showed enlargement of heart as well as heart failure. The learned counsel relied on the cases reported as Noor Khan v. The State 1995 PCr.LJ 1249, Haji Mir Aftab v. The State (1979 SCM R 320) and Barkat Ali and 3 others v. The State (1981 PCr.LJ 274) in support of his contention.
4. In our considered view there is nothing on the record to create any doubt in the certificate issued by Dr. Sajjad Hussain Malik. E.C.G., and X-rays were conducted at the District Headquarters Hospital which showed that Zaidullah had enlarged heart and that he suffers from heart failure in addition to being a case of unstable angina. Credence has also to be given to the note written by the Medical Officer that Zaidullah had been under-treatment of General Zulfiqar Ali Khan.
5. In these circumstances, the discretion exercised by the Shariat Court does not appear to be arbitrary. It has been exercised on the basis of official record. Therefore no case of interference has been made out.
' The appeal is dismissed.