FAZAL HUSSAIN and others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by petitioners accused of offences under sections 324, 452, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, as well as section 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail following a compromise reached between the parties. The complainant and injured witnesses had submitted affidavits before the trial court exculpating the accused, effectively acknowledging the settlement of the dispute. The Court held that in light of the compromise, the likelihood of conviction for the accused was significantly diminished, rendering their continued incarceration unnecessary and purposeless. Consequently, the Court granted the bail petition, ordering the release of the petitioners subject to the furnishing of bail bonds. The key principle laid down is that where a compromise has been reached between the parties and the injured witnesses have exculpated the accused, the continued detention of the accused serves no useful purpose, justifying the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Does a compromise between the parties and the submission of exculpatory affidavits by injured witnesses constitute sufficient grounds for the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Is the continued detention of an accused justified when the likelihood of conviction is negated by a compromise?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 18, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' The petitioners are involved in a case under sections 324, 452 read with section 34, P.P.C. And section 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered with Sadar Police, Jalalpur Pirwala.
2. According to the F.I.R. Khyzar Hayat complainant and his wife were sleeping in the cattle-shed on the night between 11/12-2-2003, while his mother Mst. Wasso Mai and sister Mst. Kalsoom Mai were sleeping in the adjoining room. It is contended that the petitioners and Sabir co-accused accompanied by an unidentified person entered the courtyard of the house of the complainant at 1-1/2 a.m. Sabir Hussain was armed with a .12 bore gun, while Muhammad Aslam alias Punnu was armed with a Sota. The third one was carrying a hatchet with him. The accused allegedly caused hurt to Khyzar Hayat, Mst. Kalsoom Mai and Mst. Wasso Mai. Another companion of the petitioner, who was sitting on the wall, opened fire with a carbine. On the arrival of the P.Ws., the perpetrators decamped.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that all the P.Ws. Including the complainant and the injured P.Ws. Appeared before the learned Additional Sessions Judge and submitted their affidavits in which they exculpated all the accused from the commission of the crime. He frankly conceded that these affidavits were submitted as a result of compromise arrived at between the parties.
4. In view of the compromise, there is no possibility of the accused of being convicted of any offence, therefore, further detention of the petitioners in jail is not likely to serve any purpose. I, therefore, accept this petition and order the release of the petitioners on bail, subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rupees fifty thousand each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.