Ss. 409, 420, 465, 468, 471 & 109---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 417---Criminal breach of trust by public servant or by banker, merchant, agent, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery, forgery for the purpose of cheating, using as genuine a forged document, abetment , public servant committed or attempt to commit criminal misconduct---Appreciation of evidence---Appeal against acquittal---Prosecution case was that accused-respondent got transferred the land of accused of another case in the name of his sister while the said accused of another case was in judicial custody---Record showed that accused of another case was in judicial custody from 8th September, 2008 to 30th September 2008, whereas the mutation showed his presence before the revenue authorities on 22nd September 2008---Contents of mutation reflected that same was prepared on 22nd August 2008, however, attested and signed by the parties in presence of Naib Tehsildar on 14th October 2008---Said document showed that transfer of property was made on 14th October, 2008 instead of 22nd September, 2008, while during the said dates, accused of another case was on bail---Attending circumstances suggested that presence of that accused before the Revenue Autho-rities on 14th October, 2008 could not be ruled out---Circumstances established that there was no evidence available on record to connect the accused-respondent with the commission of offence---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed in circumstances. 2018 YLR 187 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN
S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 500, 120(b) & 109---Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), Ss. 4, 16, 20, 21 & 24---Defamation, criminal conspiracy, abetment , unauthorized copying or transmission of data, unauthorized use of identity information, offences against dignity of a natural person, offences against modesty of a natural person and minor, cyber stalking---Pre-arrest bail, recalling of---Allegation against the accused was that he with the rank of Senior Police Officer, created a fake facebook profile in complainant's name ( his former wife) and thereby established digital communication with co-accused on his profile and through the cyber medium dispatched/uploaded material that included complainant's graphically explicit images---Accused induced the co-accused to establish liaison with the complainant, surprised embarrassingly as the images went viral---Argument that the accused, still struggling to save the bond, could not conceivably upload graphic images of a lady, though estranged, nonetheless being mother of his four children, to incur a perennial embarrassment, though ingeniously articulated, faded into insignificance in the face of formidable forensic evidence, inexorably pointed upon culpability of accused---Status of accused as a senior Civil Servant was beside the mark as there were no more equals in law and the office by itself did not confer respectability---Arrest in cognizable cases, an essential step towards investigation---Anticipatory bail was an extraordinary remedy, which could not be claimed in every criminal case as a substitute for post arrest bail---Accused had not been able to point out a single circumstance to even obliquely suggest any malice lurking behind the intended arrest---Ad interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier was recalled and bail petition was dismissed in circumstances. 2018 PCrLJ 739 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302---Qatl-i-amd---Bail, refusal of---Occurrence had been reported to the police quite promptly and accused had specifically been nominated in the FIR as one of the perpetrators of the alleged murder and he was attributed two firearm injuries to the deceased---One of the injuries attributed to the accused on the back of the deceased's neck was fully confirmed by the post-mortem examination report--- Eye-witnesses mentioned in the FIR stood by their statements made before the police fully implicating the accused for the murder---Offence under S.302, P.P.C. attracted the prohibitory clause contained in subsection (1) of S. 497, Cr.P.C.---Investigating agency had opined in its report that the accused was guilty only of providing behind-the-scene abetment to his co-accused and was not present at the scene of the crime but record of investigation showed that said opinion was not based upon sound material--- Prima facie, reasonable grounds existed to believe accused's involvement in the alleged offence---Bail was refused accordingly. 2016 SCMR 1529
S. 9(a)(vi)--- Corruption and corrupt practices--- Common intention/abetment by public servant---Scope---Section 9(a)(vi) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 covered crimes committed with common intention as well as abetment ---Public servants who abetted the commission of corruption by allowing acts which it was their duty to stop should be proceeded against under S.9(a)(vi) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999. 2014 SCMR 585 SUPREME-COURT
S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 109, 148, 149, 337-F (iii) & 120-B---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to qatl-i-amd, abetment , rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly, ghayr-jaifah-mutalahimah, criminal conspiracy---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Plea of alibi---Non-presence of accused at scene of occurrence accepted by the prosecution---Accused was initially implicated by the complainant for being present at the crime scene and directly firing at the deceased---During course of investigation, it was discovered that accused was in prison for some other offence at the time of the occurrence---As a result the charge sheet filed in the Trial Court contained Ss.109 & 120-B, P.P.C., meaning that the prosecution itself had relied upon the plea of alibi of the accused, and only charged him for abetment of the crime and criminal conspiracy, contradicting the stance of the complainant---Presence of accused at the crime spot at the time of commission of the crime, thus, stood excluded---Keeping in view the two conflicting versions; one given by the complainant in the FIR and the other by the investigating agency based on documentary evidence with regard to the plea of alibi, the case of the accused became one of further inquiry, falling within the ambit of S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.---Accused was granted bail accordingly. (2016 SCMR 18 SUPREME-COURT)
S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324/427/109/ 148/149---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)---Qatl-e-amd, attempt to qatl-e-amd, mischief causing damage, abetment and rioting---Bail, grant of---Version of State and complainant---Distinction---Further inquiry---Accused was nominated in F.I.R. but no specific injury to any person had been attributed to him and only generalized and collective allegation was levelled against him---Investigating agency had reached at definite conclusion that accused was not even present at the scene of crime at relevant time and had provided behind-the-scene abetment to his co-accused for commission of alleged offence---Accused had been recommended for trial only in respect of an offence under S.109, P.P.C.---Prosecution itself had two versions vis-a-vis the accused, first was of complainant party according to which accused was present at the spot and had resorted to firing and second of investigating agency according to which accused was not present at the spot and he was abetting his co-accused behind the scene---Such considerations render the case against accused one of further inquiry into his guilt---Bail was allowed.
(2012 SCMR 1137 SUPREME-COURT)
S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/324/34---Qatl-e-amd, attempt to commit Qatl-e-amd and abetment ---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Accused (father) was charged for commanding co-accused (son), who had gone into hiding and had been charged for firing effective shot at the deceased---Whether the role assigned to accused was result of exaggeration to rope him in, so that he may not be at large to pursue litigation; whether accused's stay in the village despite being named in F.I.R. could be held to be more consistent with innocence rather than guilt when co-accused had gone into hiding and whether the role of commanding attributed to accused who himself was armed with Kalashinkov could be held to be ornamental or at par with abetment , were questions calling for further inquiry---Accused's petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowing the same he was admitted to bail. (2012 SCMR 265 SUPREME-COURT)
Allegation of abetment (Conspiracy) against the petitioner in case u/S. 302/34/109 PPC. Petitioners were not present at the time of occurrence. Held, allegation of prosecution would be scanned at the proper time. Bail allowed. PLJ 1996 Cr.C. (Lah.) 1526, Suleman etc.
Allegation of instigation to murder, bail granted by Sessions Court but cancelled by High Court. Held, when bails are granted for lalkara to commit crime, and whenever reasonable doubts arise about participation in crime, accused should not be deprived of benefit of bail. Bail allowed. PLJ 1996 S.C. 414, Syed Aman Ullah Shah.