ABDUL JABBAR alias ARBELO alias MOOSO and another vs THE STATE
This matter arises from two bail applications filed on behalf of the applicants seeking post-arrest bail in Crime No. 4 of 2003 under sections 324, 353, 147, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, and Crime No. 37 of 2003 under sections 397 and 427 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 read with section 17(3) of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979. The core legal question concerns whether the applicants are entitled to bail given that the subsequent police proceedings regarding an alleged encounter and recovery of empties are shrouded in doubt. The Sindh High Court held that the prosecution's failure to recover a single bullet empty from the hundreds reportedly fired, coupled with an unsatisfactory explanation from the investigating officer, renders the subsequent proceedings doubtful. Consequently, the court granted bail to the applicants, establishing the principle that accused persons are entitled to the benefit of doubt even at the bail stage when the prosecution case suffers from significant evidentiary discrepancies.
- Are accused persons entitled to the benefit of doubt at the bail stage when police proceedings and recoveries are doubtful?
- Does the failure to recover bullet empties from an alleged police encounter provide grounds for granting bail?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 397, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 427, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 17(3), Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD MUJEE&ULLAH SIDDIQUI, J.--- By this order I intend to dispose of two bail applications submitted on behalf of the applicants in Crime No,4 of 2003, Police Station Batho Forest, under sections 324, 353, 147, 148, 149, P.P.C. And Crime No,37 of 2003, Police Station Saeedabad, under sections 397 and 427, P.P.C. Read with section 17(3) of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. ' Briefly stated the prosecution case is that a highway dacoity/ Haraba was committed in a bus plying between Nawabshah and Saeedabad. The matter was reported to Police Station Saeedabad. Saeedabad Police chased the culprits and thereafter an encounter took place in which several hundred shots were fired by the police party. The present applicants are stated to have taken protection on Mango tree and they fell from Mango tree without sustaining any injury.
3. According to Mashirnama not a single empty of the bullets out of several hundreds Fired by the police, has been recovered. The Investigating Officer was called upon to furnish explanation in this behalf. An explanation has been furnished to the effect that the land was muddy and there are lots of Mango leaves on the ground and therefore, not a single empty could be recovered. The learned State Counsel have conceded that the explanation is not satisfactory.
4. ' Notwithstanding the fact that the incident of highway dacoity took place but the subsequent proceedings are not free from doubt and consequently the applicants who are entitled to the benefit of doubt even at the bail stage are granted bail in the sum of Rs,50,000 (fifty thousand) each, in each case, and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Cited by 2 cases
- AKBAR vs THE STATE 2010 MLD 293
- NAVEED vs THE STATE 2008 PLD Karachi 154