Summary: Section 497 (2) and 497 (5) of Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)------- Benefit of doubt---Scope---Without availability of strong, cogent and convincing grounds, bail cannot be cancelled---Benefit of any doubt arising out even at bail stage should be termed as question calling for further inquiry and accused becomes entitled for grant of bail---(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 497(2) & 497(5)---Bail, cancellation of---Benefit of doubt---Scope---Without availabilityof strong, cogent and convincing grounds, bail cannot be cancelled---Benefit of any doubt arisingout even at bail stage should be termed as question calling for further inquiry and accusedbecomes entitled for grant of bail.(b) Administration of justice-------Criminal trial--- Principle---Each criminal case has its own features and is required to bedecided on its own merits independently.Haji Muhammad Nazir v. The State 2008 SCMR 807 rel.(c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 497---Fresh bail application---Scope---Fresh bail application can be moved on freshground at a subsequent stage---Law of bail does not impose any embargo on filing of successivebail applications, therefore, order passed on successive bail applications does not amount toreview of earlier order passed on bail application.Ali Sheheryar v. The State 2008 SCMR 1448 rel.(d) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 497 & 498---Bail---Different sentences---Scope---For purpose of bail, when allegedoffence for which accused is charged, entails two quantum of sentences, the lesser has to beconsidered while deciding question of bail---When offence is punishable with imprisonment orwith fine, at the bail stage the offence should not be presumed as non-bailable because it isentirely possible that at final conclusion, if accused is found guilty and court punishes him withfine only, his incarceration as under trial prisoner would not be justiciable.(e) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 497(5)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 337-L---Hurt---Bail, cancellation of---Bail grantedby Trial Court to accused persons was cancelled by Lower Appellate Court---Validity---According to FIR and medical certificate, complainant only sustained internal injuries and aftermedical treatment complainant did not remain hospitalized---Injuries attributed to accused werewithin the purview of other hurts punishable under S. 337-L, P.P.C.---Complainant/injuredwitness did not disclose that injuries caused to him in any way endangered his life or caused himto remain in severe bodily pain for twenty days or more or had rendered him unable to followordinary pursuits of life for twenty days or more---Injuries sustained by complainant were covered by S. 337-L(2), P.P.C. which was bailable in nature---Accused persons could not be keptbehind the bars as mere punishment for an offence which was bailable in nature and fell withinthe definition of S. 337-L(2), P.P.C.---High Court set aside the order passed by Lower AppellateCourt and restored that of Trial Court--- Petition was allowed in circumstances.State through Advocate-General N.-W.F.P. v. Zubair and 4 others PLD 1986 SC 173 andThe State v. Rafiq Ahmed Channa 2010 SCMR 580 ref.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: S.489-F PPCHabitual money squeezer (Bail dismissed)

Summary: S.302,457,458,380,397,511 100 PPC 13/15 AAPlea of self defence, separate FIRs meet the ends of justice (Petition allowed)

Summary: S.302,34 PPCRule of consistency (Bail allowed)

Summary: S.324,34,337-D,427 PPCSection 427 PPC missing from charge sheet (Remanded for inclusion)