Pakistan Case Law
2003 SCMR 1709

SAIF ALI vs THE STATE and another

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2003 SCMR 1709
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No,662-L of 2002
Date2002-12-09
Judge(s)Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Falak Sher
Authored byTanvir Ahmed Khan
ResultBail refused
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 an order of the Lahore High Court, which had recalled the concession of bail previously granted to the petitioner by an Additional Sessions Judge. The core legal question was whether the High Court's decision to cancel the bail was justified given the petitioner's arguments regarding the complainant party being the aggressors in a land dispute. The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's order, holding that the High Court had provided cogent reasons for recalling the bail. The Court emphasized that issues regarding possession of the disputed land and the determination of the aggressor are factual matters that should be adjudicated by the trial court after the production of evidence, rather than being decided at the bail stage. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal, affirming the cancellation of bail and maintaining the principle that disputed factual contentions should not be resolved during bail proceedings to avoid prejudicing the trial.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is it appropriate for an appellate court to determine disputed questions of possession and aggression at the bail stage?
  • Can the Supreme Court interfere with a High Court order that provides cogent reasons for the cancellation of bail?
  • Should factual contentions regarding the merits of a case be decided during bail proceedings?
bail cancellationleave to appealcriminal procedureland disputeprejudice to trial

ORDER

' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the order dated 16-7-2002 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,4386-B of 2002 whereby the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, at the instance of Muhammad Ilyas respondent No,2 recalled the concession of bail earlier granted to the petitioner by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, through his order dated 13-6-2002.

2. We have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the documents appended with this petition. It is reflected from the perusal thereof that in this case Ahmad Bibi lost her life and the complainant and his brother Riaz, sustained injuries. Learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments has made reference to certain orders of a learned Civil Judge whereby interim injunction qua the dispute of the land claimed by the injured, was refused. His stance is that it was the complainant party who was the aggressor as the petitioner has purchased the said property for a consideration of Rs,2,00,000 through a registered sale-deed. We do not want to dilate upon the issues raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner qua the stance of possession of the disputed land where the occurrence had taken place as this exercise may prejudice the case of the other party. All these factors would be decided by the learned trial Court after the production of the evidence during the course of the trial.

' Learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court has given cogent reasons for recalling the earlier order whereby the petitioner was granted concession of bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

3. In this view of the matter, we do not find any justification to interfere with the same. This petition is, therefore, dismissed: Leave is refused.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.