AMANULLAH and anothers vs THE STATE
This is a criminal bail application before the Sindh High Court, wherein the applicants sought post-arrest bail in a case involving charges of firing at a police party, encountering law enforcement, and rescuing arrested absconders. The core legal question was whether the applicants made out a case for further inquiry or exceptional circumstances warranting the grant of post-arrest bail given the gravity of the allegations and recovery of weapons. The court held that prima facie evidence existed showing the applicants were apprehended at the spot with pistols and bullets after an armed encounter resulting in the rescue of arrested persons. The court concluded that reasonable grounds existed to believe the applicants were involved in the charged offences. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed, reinforcing the principle that persons reasonably connected to heinous crimes involving direct assaults on law enforcement agencies are not ordinarily entitled to the concession of bail.
- Whether an accused person found armed at the scene of a police encounter and connected with the rescue of arrested persons is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does the submission of a challan including Section 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code preclude a court from denying bail based on prima facie evidence?
- Are reasonable grounds of involvement sufficient to disallow bail in cases involving attacks on law enforcement personnel?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.---Granted.
2. Dismissed being infructuous.
3. On 7-7-2004 the Inspector Abdul Hameed Penhwar received information about the presence of some absconders in the Otaq of Malook. On the said information the police party reached there where they apprehended four absconders at 6-00 p.m. Suddenly from the village several persons came out armed with Kalashnikovs, guns and Lathies including the present applicants. They started firing at the police party. The encounter took place between those persons and police which continued for some time with the result that three arrested accused persons were got released by these persons from the custody of police. Those persons also went inside the Otaq and fired at the police party. Then further encounter continued for about one hour and thereafter arrested accused person ran away but the police were successful in arresting the applicants from whose possessions pistols and bullets were secured. The applicants and the property were brought to police station where F.I.R. Was registered.
' The learned Advocate for the applicant has stated that section 324, P.P.C. Is not attracted as one of the police officers opined that the offence would not fall under the said section. However he has stated that the challan has been submitted in which the section 324, P.P.C. Has been included. He has further stated that the applicants are' in jail for one year and are not required for any inVestigation therefore bail may be granted.
' Conversely the learned A.A.-G. Has stated that the applicants who were armed with pistols fired at the police party and deter them from discharging their official duty and get released four accused, therefore, they are not entitled to concession of bail.
I have given due consideration to the arguments, gone through the material available on record and found that the police arrested four accused persons who were required in some cases. Several persons armed with deadly weapons came out from the village. The applicants were amongst those persons. General allegation has been levelled that all the persons fired at the police party in order to rescue their companions who were arrested by the police. In doing so they were successful in releasing three of them. Again the encounter continued for one hour. The arrested accused ran away but the police were successful in arresting the present applicants and from their possession pistols and bullets were secured. All the P. Ws. Have supported the prosecution case. The Mashirnama of place of incident shows that empties lying at the place of incident were secured as declared by the. Learned A.A.-G. From all theses facts it is clear that prima facie case has been made against the applicants and there are reasonable grounds for believing that the applicants are involved in the case hence they are not entitled to the concession of bail. The application is dismissed.