TANVEER ALI vs THE STATE
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from a criminal case registered under Sections 382 and 459 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving allegations of armed robbery and house trespass. The petitioner was not named in the initial First Information Report and was only implicated in a subsequent supplementary statement based on suspicion. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the absence of his name in the FIR, the lack of an identification parade, and the failure of the prosecution to effect any incriminating recovery despite the petitioner's physical remand. The Court held that suspicion, regardless of its strength, cannot substitute for proof. Finding that the prosecution's case against the petitioner required further inquiry, the Court determined that the matter fell within the scope of Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court admitted the petitioner to bail, establishing the principle that where an accused is not named in the FIR and no recovery is made, the case warrants further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail.
- Can an accused person be denied bail when they were not named in the initial FIR and were only implicated in a supplementary statement based on suspicion?
- Does the absence of any incriminating recovery from an accused justify the grant of bail under the principle of further inquiry?
- Is a supplementary statement naming an accused on the basis of suspicion sufficient to establish a prima facie case for the purpose of refusing bail?
- Section 382, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 459, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Petitioner Tanveer Ali through the instant petition has sought for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 556, dated 8-7-2003 under section 382/459, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station Nishat Abad, Faisalabad.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. Is that on the night between 6/7-7-2003, three unknown persons armed with pistols have trespassed into the house of the complainant through the roof there and they on fire-arm point have taken Golden ornaments worth Rs. 4, 50,000 and cash Rs.2,25,000 from the Safe Almirah and have also beaten him and his wife and they thereafter managed good their escape.
3. It has been contended on his behalf that he has falsely been roped in that his name has figured in the supplementary statement recorded on 12-7-2003 of the complainant; that no recovery of any type has been effected from him; and that he is behind the bars and a previous non-convict.
4. Conversely the learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition on the ground that his name has figured in the supplementary statement recorded on 12-7-2003 for the complainant and so he sufficiently is connected with the crime. He, however, has conceded that no recovery of any type was effected from him.
5. I have carefully considered the arguments made from both the sides with the help of the available record.
6. The fact remains that he is not named in the F.I.R. He was also not put to any identification test.
His name has figured in the supplementary statement, dated 12-7-2003 of the complainant. I have gone through the same. He in the same has named him as one of the culprits on the basis of suspicion or 'GAVEER'. It may be mentioned here that suspicion, howsoever, strong may be but cannot take place of proof.
7. Besides this, nothing incriminating has been recovered from him despite the fact that he remained with the police on physical remand for about four days.
8. All these facts make his case as one of further inquiry into his guilt and so is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
9. He is behind the bars and stated to the previous non-convict.
10. In these circumstances I, find him entitled to bail.
11. The petition, therefore, is accepted and he is admitted to bailsubject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.