Zulfiqar vs The State
This matter arises from a petition filed by Zulfiqar seeking pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 304 registered at Police Station A-Division, Sheikhupura, for offences under sections 302, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail when the investigation agency found him not to have resorted to firing or committed any overt act, and no crime weapon empty was recovered. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and confirmed the pre-arrest bail, holding that an accused person should not be deprived of liberty for recoveries that are legally inconsequential, especially where no motive was attributed and the petitioner was implicated due to association with the principal accused. The key principle laid down is that pre-arrest bail may be confirmed when the investigating agency's findings negate overt acts and recoveries are inconsequential.
- Whether pre-arrest bail should be confirmed when the accused is not connected to the motive and allegedly indulged only in ineffective firing without committing any overt act?
- Is an accused to be deprived of liberty merely for the purpose of effecting a recovery that is likely to be legally inconsequential?
- Does false implication due to association with the principal accused warrant the confirmation of pre-arrest bail?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.-- Through this petition Zulfiqar petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 304 registered at Police Station A-Division, Sheikhupura on 10.07.2004 for offences under section 302/148/149, PPC. Earlier on an application submitted by the petitioner before the Court of Session, Sheikhupura seeking the same relief had been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura vide order dated 15.09.2004. Hence, the present petition before this Court.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been observed by he that apparently the petitioner was not connected with the motive set up in the FIR and admittedly the petitioner had not caused any injury to any person during the alleged incident.
The allegation levelled against the-petitioner in the FIR is only in respect of indulging in ineffective firing. According to the Case-diary No. 25, dated 09.10.2004 it has already been found by the investigating agency that the petitioner had not resorted to firing at the spot and that he was merely present outside the complainant's house at the time of the alleged occurrence. If that be so, then apparently the petitioner had not committed any overt act during the alleged occurrence.
The learned counsel for the State as well as the police officer present with the record have confirmed -the fact that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and also that in view of the above-mentioned finding of the investigating agency nothing is to be recovered from him possession. Even otherwise even if any weapon is recovered from the possession of the petitioner the same is likely to be of no consequence inasmuch as it is being alleged that the petitioner was armed with a pistol at the relevant time but no crime-empty of a pistol was recovered from the place of occurrence. An accused person is not to be deprived of his liberty merely for the purpose of effecting a recovery which is likely to be legally inconsequential, lt has vehemently been argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner happens to be a close friend of the principal accused in this case namely Javed Iqbal and it is on that account that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the criminal case in hand so that he may not pursue this case in defence of the principal accused, ln the absence of any motive alleged against the petitioner prompting him to participate in the main occurrence this submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner has not appeared to me to be without any substance of foundation.
3. For what has been discussed above this petition is accepted and the ad-interning pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner by this Court vide order dated 14.10.2004 is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing of a fresh 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 Area Magistrate of Police Station A- Division, Sheikhupura within a period of two weeks from today.