Syed SHABHAT RAZA ZAIDI vs STATE
This bail application was filed by the applicant, an Assistant Professor, who was accused of murdering his wife by setting her on fire. The incident occurred on September 22, 2003, but the First Information Report (FIR) was not registered until October 17, 2003, following a letter from the deceased's father. The applicant contended that the incident was a suicide rather than murder. To support this, the applicant's counsel relied on statements from a medical officer and an investigating officer, both of whom recorded declarations from the deceased stating that she had set herself on fire and that her husband was innocent. Furthermore, the prosecution's investigation remarks indicated a lack of strong evidence to implicate the accused, suggesting the challan was submitted merely for a judicial verdict. The High Court, in its tentative assessment, held that the possibility of suicide could not be ruled out, making the question of guilt a matter for trial. Consequently, the Court determined that the case required further inquiry and granted bail to the applicant.
- Whether a case falls under the ambit of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 if there is a tentative possibility that the deceased committed suicide rather than being murdered?
- Can bail be granted to an accused when the deceased's own statements to medical and police officers exonerate the accused and suggest self-immolation?
- Does a significant delay in lodging an FIR, combined with lack of strong implicating evidence in the prosecution's investigation, support the grant of bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. This is an application for bail of the applicant, in a murder case, which occurred in the house of the deceased lady Mst. Qaisara Abbas on 22.9.2003. The report of this incident was not lodged with police prior to 17.10.2003. It seems that on a letter dated 15.10.2003 written by Syed Ali Abbas, father of the deceased lady, from Lahore to the SHO, Police Station Mobina Town, Karachi East, the incident was reported to police, who incorporated the letter as FIR of the aforesaid incident on 17.10.2003. At the conclusion of the investigation the applicant was challaned for facing trial. It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is a serving Assistant Professor of Botany in D.J. Science College, Karachi. It is urged that the alleged incident is one of suicide and not of, murder. Learned counsel for the applicant during the hearing has referred before me various statements (pages 53 to 73) of the Court file, wherein the deceased lady is shown to have, stated that the applicant is innocent. Another statement of Medical Officer, Dr. Ahsan Ali of Patel Hospital, Karachi is also referred, which shows that he (doctor) was informed by the deceased lady that she had herself set fire to herself. In yet another statement of SI Nadeem Iqbal, it is disclosed that the deceased lady had declared her husband (applicant) being innocent. Learned counsel has lastly argued that the PDSP Investigation has in his remarks dated 8.12.2003 disclosed that there was no strong evidence beyond doubt to implicate the accused, but it was thought appropriate to submit the challan for a judicial verdict. Learned counsel lastly submitted that the case against the applicant would call for further enquiry as envisaged under Section 497(2) Cr.P.C.
2. Mr. Habib Rasheed, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has not been able to controvert the above contentions and hence does not oppose the bail plea. I have heard both the learned counsel and perused the relevant documents. The record of the prosecution file, in its tentative assessment, does not rule out the possibility of the case being one of suicide. Thus, it is yet to be determined at the time of trial when the evidence is recorded, whether the deceased died as a result of suicide or she was killed by setting fire to her by the applicant.
3. In such view of the matter, the provisions of Section 497(2) Cr.P.C. are attracted. The applicant seems to be entitled to bail. He is, therefore, allowed bail subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs, 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) and PR Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.