Reference can
be made to the case of ‘‘Muhammad Yousaf
Butt v. P.C. Abdul Lateef Shar and another’’
(2012 SCMR 1945) wherein the Hon’ble
Supreme Court of Pakistan cancelled the bail
with the following observations:
“We are cognizant of the law that once
the High Court has exercised his
discretion of granting bail to the
respondent No.1, there has to be very
special and overwhelming circumstances
to cancel the bail. In the case of
“Naseem Malik v. The State” (2004
SCMR 283), this Court has cancelled the
bail on inter alia, the ground that the
accused was specifically named and
comprehensively described in the F.I.R.
as one of the conspirators and
perpetrators of the crime and it was
noted that the statement of co-accused
implicating the accused can validly be
taken into consideration while deciding
such matters. As discussed above, there
is an apparent connection of the
respondent No.1 in the commission of
alleged crime in this case and there is
sufficient material to connect him with
the same. The High Court apparently
has misread the record in this regard in
granting of bail to respondent No.1. We,
therefore, do not consider this case was
such that respondent No.1 ought to have
been granted bail.”
Used in Judgment of
LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
| Criminal Proceedings 35056/19
|
0 Comments