PESHAWAR: Peshawar High Court has granted bail to an accused allegedly involved in attempted murder of prominent renal transplant surgeon Prof Asif Malik here over two months ago.

A single-member bench consisting of Justice Wiqar Ahmad accepted bail petition of the accused, Sultan Raza, a resident of Kohat, on condition of furnishing two surety bonds of Rs800,000 each.

Prof Asif Malik was attacked near his residence in University Town Peshawar when he was returning from hospital. He was left critically injured in the attack.

The FIR of the occurrence was registered on April 1, 2026, on the complaint of Prof Malik’s son Yousaf Malik, who stated that he heard gun shots and when he came out of his room he saw his father in injured condition.

Prof Asif Malik was injured in the attack more than two months ago in Hayatabad

The complainant stated that his father told him that certain persons opened firing on him. He also allegedly noticed a motorcar leaving the place of occurrence.

Initial report didn’t contain the names of attackers, but culprits were stated to be identifiable if produced before the injured.

During investigation, the investigating officer allegedly secured CCTV footage from the vicinity and, on the basis of thereof, detected a vehicle suspected to have been used in the commission of the offence.

The vehicle was registered in the name of a woman, who disclosed that it remained in possession of the present petitioner and a co-accused Shafaat during relevant period.

Both the accused persons were arrested the very next day of the occurrence and they were also identified in the identification parade by the inured.

Police claimed that the accused had claimed during investigation that they had monetary dispute with the victim.

Advocate Abid Wazir appeared for the petitioner and stated that his client was falsely implicated in the case. He added that the petitioner was not directly charged in the FIR by the complainant.

The bench, in its six-page detailed order, observed that the firing was attributed to co-accused Shafaat, from whose possession crime weapon was also recovered.

The bench observed that the petitioner was accused of facilitation and sharing common intention and such liability, though legally recognised, was not to be presumed mechanically at bail stage merely from alleged presence or association.

“The existence of preconcert, prior meeting of minds’ active participation or conduct manifesting a shared criminal design would require deeper appreciation of evidence, which is the function of learned trial court after recording evidence,” the bench pointed out.

“At this stage, the court cannot overlook that initial version did not name or identify the petitioner. The improvement in prosecution story, the manner of identification through CCTV footage, the exact position of petitioner in the vehicle, and extent of his alleged participation are all questions calling for further inquiry within the meaning of Sction 497(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure,” the bench ruled.

It said that mere detection of a vehicle allegedly connected with the petitioner, without an independent direct role of causing injury, did not by itself conclusively establish, at that tentative stage, that petitioner shared the intention of principal accused.

The bench observed that it was also settled that bail was not to be withheld as punishment.

Published in Dawn, June 24th, 2026