RIAZ HUSSAIN vs THE STATE
This criminal petition concerns an application for post-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, Riaz Hussain, who was charged under sections 302, 109, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for his alleged involvement in a conspiracy to commit the murder of Shahid Abbas. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner conspired with co-accused individuals to kill the deceased as retaliation for the murder of their brother, relying on statements recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The core legal question was whether the prosecution's evidence regarding the alleged conspiracy warranted the petitioner's continued detention pending trial. The Court observed that the credibility of the prosecution's claim—specifically that the petitioner would openly hatch a murder conspiracy in the presence of witnesses—required serious consideration and deeper scrutiny. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner's case fell within the scope of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petition was accepted, and the petitioner was granted post-arrest bail, emphasizing that the case necessitated further investigation into the petitioner's guilt.
- Does an allegation of conspiracy to commit murder, based on statements heard by witnesses, constitute sufficient grounds to deny post-arrest bail?
- When does an allegation of conspiracy warrant further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the open nature of an alleged conspiracy a relevant factor in determining whether a case requires further inquiry for the purpose of bail?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Petitioner Riaz Hussain through the instant petition has sought for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R.
No.380 dated 7-11-2002 under sections 302/109/34, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station, Bhalwal, District Sargodha.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. Is that on 7-11-2002 at about 9-25 a.m. Ghulam Hussain armed with .30 bore pistol, Ibrar Hussain and Ahmad Hassan with .12 bore gun, Imran with carbin in furtherance of their common intention had committed the Qatl-e-Amd of Shahid Abbas, the deceased son of the complainant Riaz Hussain on 6-11-2003 had hatched up conspiracy along with Ghulam Hussain, Ibrar Hussain, Ahmad Hassan and Imran to do away with the deceased as he had murdered their brother. He was heard and seen doing so by Nasar Abbas and Inayat Hussain.
3. It has been contended on his behalf that he has falsely been roped in with mala fide intention on the part of the complainant; that he did not hatch up any conspiracy to do away the deceased; and that the evidence against them in this regard is fabricated one.
4. Conversely, the learned State counsel has opposed the petition on the ground that he had hatched up conspiracy with his co-accused to do away with the deceased.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides of the parties with the help of available record.
6. He allegedly had hatched up conspiracy with his aforesaid 'co-accused for the murder of the deceased.
7. It has so been mentioned in the statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. Of Naseer Abbas and Inayat Hussain. The same are to the effect that they on the above said day had heard him conspiring with his aforesaid co-accused to murder the deceased Shahid Abbas as he had murdered their brother.
8. The question that if a person would hatch up conspiracy of murder of some one so openly to be heard by others, needs serious consideration. His case, therefore, certainly is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Requiring further inquiry into his guilt.
9. He is behind the bars and stated to be previous non-convict.
10. In these circumstances, I find that the case for his enlargement on bail has been made out. The petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- NAZAR HUSSAIN SHAH and another vs THE STATE 2007 P Cr. L J 1274