HAQ NAWAZ and another vs STATE
The petitioners, Haq Nawaz and Ghulam Shabbir, sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 430/2004 registered under Sections 337-A(ii), 337-A(iii), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Sarai Sadhu, District Khanewal. The core legal question concerned whether the petitioner Ghulam Shabbir was entitled to post-arrest bail given his alleged role and the fact that co-accused had already been granted bail. At the outset, the counsel for the petitioners did not press the petition for the first petitioner, Haq Nawaz, leading to its dismissal as withdrawn for him. For the second petitioner, Ghulam Shabbir, the court held that since he was not found present at the spot during the investigation, his case fell prima facie under further inquiry, especially considering that other co-accused had been bailed out and he had been incarcerated for over four months. The court laid down the principle that an accused cannot be detained indefinitely when co-accused are granted bail and the investigation creates room for further inquiry regarding presence and participation.
- Whether an accused whose presence at the spot is doubted during investigation is entitled to post-arrest bail on the rule of consistency with co-accused?
- Can a post-arrest bail petition be dismissed as withdrawn when not pressed by the petitioner's counsel?
- Does prolonged incarceration without conclusion of trial warrant the grant of bail when the case falls under further inquiry?
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Petitioners Haqnawaz and Ghulam Shabbir have moved this post arrest bail in case FIR No, 430/2004 dated 4.11.2004 registered u/Ss. 337-A (ii)/337-A(iii)/148/149 PPC on the complaint of Muhammad Nawaz son of Rajab Ali at Police Station Sarai Sadhu District, Khanewal.
2. Prosecution story as narrated in the FIR is that on 3.11.2004 at 6.00 p.m. the complainant/injured was coming to his- home and when he reached near the peter engine of Ajmal Shah, co-accused Wali Dad emerged there and raised lalkara to teach him a lesson upon which, Haq Nawazpetitioner armed with hatchet, Ghulam Shabbir armed with hunter, Muhammad Ramzan and Bashir Ahmad armed with sotas came there, Haq Nawaz gave hatchet blow on left side of complainant's head, Ghulam Shabbir petitioner hit the nose and face of the complainant with his hunter.
The complainant fell on the ground and all the accused persons gave him blows on different parts of body of complainant with their respective weapons, upon hue and cry, the PWs attracted towards the spot and the accused persons fled away.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners at the very out set does not press this bail petition to the extent of Haq Nawaz accused/Petitioner No, 1.
4. Consequently this petition stands dismissed as withdrawn to the extent of Haq Nawaz Petitioner No, 1.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner to the extent of Ghulam Shabbir Petitioner No, 2 submits that in this case pre-arrest bail of Wali Dad accused has been confirmed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge vide order-dated 23,4,2004 aid Muhammad Ramzan and Bashir Ahmad have been allowed bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 8.12.2004. Further submits that Ghulam Shabbir petitioner was not present at the spot when the occurrence took place so, he is innocent and has falsely been involved in this case.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition and submitted that challan has been submitted in the Court of competent jurisdiction on 8.1.2005, specific role has been attributed to Ghulam Shabbir petitioner so he is not entitled for the concession of bail.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, Ghulam Shabbir petitioner was not found to be present at the spot during investigation which prima facie makes petitioner's case that of further enquiry. He is behind the bars for the last more than four months. In the circumstances of the case when other co-accused have been bailed out having specifically nominated in the FIR the petitioner cannot be put behind the bars for an indefinite period. Petitioner Ghulam Shabbir is allowed bail in the sum of Rs, 50,000/- with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.