JAWAID alias BUILDER vs THE STATE
This bail application arises from a criminal case registered under sections 395/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, later challaned under sections 454/382/34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving allegations of dacoity and theft at a medical store. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to post-arrest bail given the existence of conflicting prosecution versions regarding the incident and the principle of consistency regarding co-accused already granted bail. The court observed that the First Information Report and subsequent statements of prosecution witnesses under section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, presented two distinct versions of the incident, creating doubt regarding the prosecution's narrative. Furthermore, the court noted that the recovery of stolen items from an open space after a significant delay warranted further scrutiny. Holding that the determination of the correct version of events is a matter for trial, the court granted bail to the applicant. The key principle laid down is that where the prosecution case suffers from material contradictions and conflicting versions, the case requires further inquiry, thereby entitling the accused to the concession of bail.
- Does the existence of two conflicting versions of an incident in the prosecution's case constitute grounds for further inquiry under the bail provisions?
- Is an accused entitled to bail on the principle of consistency if co-accused have already been granted the same relief?
- Can the court resolve conflicting prosecution versions at the bail stage?
- Section 498, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 395, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 454, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' MRS. QAISAR IQBAL, J.--- Applicant Jawaid alias Builder son of Rahim Baloch has filed bail application under section 498/497, Cr.P.C., detained in Crime No,166 of 2005 under section 395/34 registered at Police Station Risala Karachi (South).
2. ' Precisely the facts leading to the prosecution case are that the complainant Muhammad Ajmal lodged report stating therein that he was working as Branch Manager with Messrs Pharmax Pakistan Pvt. Ltd., which has the medical store near main gate of Emergency Ward Civil Hospital, Karachi, and provide the emergency medicines to the ward patients. On 19-9-2005 at about 1119 hours he along with his colleagues was present in the shop when two unknown, could be recognized from the faces, came at the shop and gave prescription slip for medicines. Meanwhile, their companions 8-9 in number, demanded medicines immediately. On the complainant's refusal four boys out of the eight culprits came inside the shop including the applicant and surreptitiously removed the medicines from the shop. The matter was informed on 15 Madadgar Police and the report was lodged against the applicant and 8 accomplices for commission of the crime. The applicant was arrested on 28-9-2005 in the commission of the charged offence.
3. ' The learned counsel appearing for the applicant has contended that there are two versions of the incident as depicted in the first information report and other spelled out from the testimony of P.Ws.
4. Sajjad and Ratan, the star-witnesses of the prosecution. In the first version, the complainant has narrated that the applicant along with his companion had surreptitiously removed the medicines from the shop while the second version reflects that the applicant was in the habit of demanding money from the complainant and others, running business at the place of incident and on refusal of the complainant to pay the demanded money, the applicant, who was earlier known to the complainant, along with, his 8 companion, committed charged offence. It is urged that the recovery was effected after 14 days of the incident and 5 days after the arrest of the applicant from the tin of milk pack contained in the carton in the presence of the police constables. The recovery from the open space speaks in volume about the investigation conducted in the case. It is next urged that the co-accused Waqas and Shahid have been admitted on bail by the trial Court. The case of the present applicant is at par with the co-accused Shahid, therefore, on the principle of consistency the applicant is also entitled to the concession of bail.
5. ' The learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application on the premises that the P.W. Sajjad and Ratan in their statements under section 164, Cr.P.C. Have connected the applicant in the commission of the crime. The recovery was affected on the pointation of the applicant and the case of co-accused Waqas and Shahid is on different footing than that of the applicant, therefore, the applicant is not Entitled to the concession of bail.
6. ' I have considered the arguments advanced at bar. The perusal of the F.I.R. Shows that the applicant and co-accused were named in the commission of the dacoity in the complainant's shop but they have been challaned under sections 454/382/34, P.P.C. It is also emerged from the statement of complainant as well as statements of P.Ws. Sajjad and Ratan recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. Before the Judicial Magistrate that there are two versions of the incident. It is yet to be resolved at the trial as to which one of the versions depicted in the case is correct. This issue cannot be resolved at this stage, therefore, the case of the applicant requires further enquiry. The applicant's bail application is granted. He is released on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.