In a significant ruling, the Peshawar High Court granted bail to two accused individuals in a high-profile terrorism case. The court emphasized the importance of concrete evidence and the right to a fair trial. Additionally, the judgment highlighted key legal principles, such as the scope of further inquiry and the application of anti-terrorism laws.
Background of the Case
The case involved serious allegations, including attempted murder, rioting, and possession of explosives. According to the prosecution, six unidentified terrorists attacked a police party, resulting in injuries to police officials. Subsequently, two terrorists died during the encounter, while the others fled. The petitioners, Rahmatullah and Rafiullah, were arrested and accused of involvement in the crime. However, the prosecution relied heavily on a supplementary statement from a witness, who claimed the accused were friends with the deceased terrorists.
Legal Grounds for Granting Bail
The court found no direct evidence linking the petitioners to the crime. For instance, the witness’s statement was vague and based on rumors rather than facts. Moreover, mobile data records failed to establish any contact between the accused and the terrorists during the incident. The court also noted that the prosecution had not submitted the challan despite the accused being in custody for seven months.
Concept of Further Inquiry
The judgment revolved around the legal provision of “further inquiry” under Section 497(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court explained that when evidence is insufficient or unclear, the case qualifies for further investigation. Consequently, the accused become eligible for bail. This approach ensures that individuals are not unjustly detained without solid evidence.
Anti-Terrorism Act and Bail Restrictions
The prosecution argued that Section 21-D(4) of the Anti-Terrorism Act restricts bail in terrorism cases. However, the court clarified that this provision applies only when there is strong evidence of involvement. In this case, the lack of incriminating material meant the restriction did not apply. The court reaffirmed that the presumption of innocence remains paramount, regardless of the severity of the allegations.
Importance of Evidence in Criminal Cases
The ruling underscores the necessity of credible evidence in criminal trials. Without proof of abetment or direct involvement, the court cannot deny bail. Furthermore, the judgment serves as a reminder that general rumors or assumptions cannot replace factual evidence.
Conclusion
The court’s decision to grant bail reflects a commitment to justice and legal fairness. It also highlights the importance of adhering to due process and protecting the rights of the accused. For individuals facing similar legal challenges, seeking expert legal assistance is crucial.
For professional assistance with criminal law services and related legal matters, contact:
Muhammad Amin, Advocate
📞 Phone: 0313-9708019 | 0335-1990495
📧 Email: muhammadaminadvo111@gmail.com