ZAHOOR AHMAD vs THE STATE
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from F.I.R. No. 569, registered under Section 324 and Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, concerning an incident where the petitioner, Zahoor Ahmad, was accused of causing a firearm injury to the complainant's brother. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the nature of the injury attributed to him and the duration of his incarceration. The Court observed that the petitioner was alleged to have caused a single firearm injury on a non-vital part of the victim's body (the left leg) and did not repeat the fire. Consequently, the Court held that it remained a matter of further inquiry whether the act constituted an offence under Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, thereby attracting the provisions of Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Considering the petitioner had been incarcerated for over eleven months and was a previous non-convict, the Court granted post-arrest bail, emphasizing that the case warranted further inquiry into the petitioner's guilt.
- Does the infliction of a single firearm injury on a non-vital part of the body, without repetition, justify the grant of bail under the principle of further inquiry?
- When does a case fall under the scope of Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 regarding further inquiry into guilt?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Petitioner Zahoor Ahmad through the instant petition has sought for post-arrest bail in the case, F.I.R. No.569 registered under section 324 read with section 34, P.P.C. With Police Station Saddar, Chiniot, District Jhang on 22-11-2002.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. Is that on 20-11-2002 at about 3/4 p.m. The complainant Azhar Hussain and his younger brother Mazhar Hussain were present in the house. Manzoor Ahmad with .12 bore carbine, Zahoor with .12 bore gun and Irshad with Sota came there raising Lalkaras.
They said to Mazhar Hussain to teach him for lesson for abusing them. Manzoor Hussain fired with carbine, which hit Mazhar Hussain on leg, who fell down. In that condition Irshad inflicted him Sota blows hitting on his fingers of right hand and the back of the chest. On their noise and report of the fires, Muhammad Ali and Syed Ali Abbas were attracted to the spot and they rescued them from the accused.
3. The motive behind the occurrence is that the cattle of the accused had entered the peas crop of Mazhar Hussain and over the same there was exchange of abuses between them and they also grappled with each other. The accused on that grudge had committed the above act.
4. It has been contended on his behalf that he has been falsely roped in; that he has been attributed only one injury on the. Left leg of the injured Mazhar Hussain; that he is behind the bars for the last about 11 months and that he is previous non-convict.
5. Conversely, the learned State counsel has opposed the petition on the ground that he is named in the F.I.R.; that he has been ascribed fire-arm injury to injured Mazhar Hussain on his left leg; and that recovery has also been effected from him and so he is apparently connected with the crime.
6. I have carefully considered the submissions made from both the sides with the help of the available record.
7. He has been ascribed fire-arm injury to injured Mazhar Hussain on his left leg. He did not repeat the fire to him. The injury attributed to him was on the non-vital part of the body of the said injured.
It is, therefore, yet to be determined that if injury attributed to him attracts an offence under section 324, P.P.C. Or not. His case, therefore, is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Calling for further inquiry into his guilt.
8. He is stated to be behind the bars for the last more than 11 months and previous non-convict.
9. In these circumstances, .1 accept this petition and admit him to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.