Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MAHMOOD AHMAD and others VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Mukhtar Ahmed Junejo, Manzoor Hussain Sial, Saad Saood Jan Title: MAHMOOD AHMAD and others vs THE STATE Case No.: Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 1-L of 1995 Date of Judgment:1995-01-11 Reported As: 1995 SCMR 1242 Result: Leave refused
Judgment ORDER ' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioners are facing trial in the Court of the Sessions Judge at Okara on charges under section 302 read with section 149, and section 148, Pakistan Penal Code. They were granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge on the ground mainly that in the challan submitted by the prosecuting agency they had been placed in column No,2 and that no overt act had been attributed to them during the course of the occurrence. On an application moved by the complainant the High Court cancelled the bail granted to them by the learned trial Court. They seek leave to appeal from this Court. 2. The trial of the petitioners has already commenced and two witnesses have been examined. It will not be proper for us at this stage to consider the question of bail lest any observations made by us should influence the trial Court one way or the other. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner's points out that in his order the learned Single Judge who cancelled the bail has made observations which are likely to divert the course of justice. We have gone through the order and unfortunately we find substance in his assertion. The learned Judge has expressed himself very strongly on certain aspects of the case without adding the usual cautions that the observations he is recording are of tentative nature and are relevant only for the purpose of the disposal- of the bail application. This omission on the part of the learned Judge can possibly adverse at the petitioners at the trial. In the circumstances, we direct the trial Court that it should take the observations of the learned Single Judge entirely as of ad hoc nature, relevant only for the purpose of the disposal of the bait-application. It should not allow anything said in the order of the learned Judge to influence it while determining the question of guilt or innocence of the
---
## Page 2
petitioner and that the decision on this question should be based wholly on the appreciation of the evidence led before it during the trial. With these observations leave is refused.