Muhammad Ashraf And Another vs The State
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by two accused persons, Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Ramzan, in a case involving charges under Sections 148, 302, 149, 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(i), and 337-L(2) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given the circumstances of the investigation and the nature of the allegations. The Court observed that the FIR was lodged with significant delay, the petitioners were not directly linked to the motive, and the investigating agency had found petitioner No. 1 to be innocent and physically incapable of the assault. Furthermore, petitioner No. 2 had sustained injuries that were suppressed in the FIR, and a cross-complaint had been filed. Holding that the case against the petitioners called for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the Court granted bail. The key principle laid down is that where investigation findings suggest innocence, suppression of injuries on the accused, and the existence of a cross-version, a case for further inquiry is established, justifying the grant of bail.
- Does the suppression of injuries sustained by an accused in the FIR constitute a ground for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be granted when the investigating agency finds the accused innocent and incapable of committing the alleged offense?
- Is the existence of a cross-complaint regarding the same incident a relevant factor for the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(2), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.~ Through this petition Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Ramzan petitioners have sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 38 registered at Police Station Sadar Gojra, District Toba Tek Singh on 7.2.2004 for offences Under Sections 148/302/149, PPC.
During the investigation Sections 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(i) and 337-L(2), PPC were added to the F.I.R.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been observed that the F.I.R, in this case had been lodged with a noticeable delay and admittedly both the present petitioners had not caused any injury to Muhammad Arshad deceased. According to the F.I.R. Muhammad Ashraf petitioner No. 1 had given three Danda blows to Iftikhar PW and Muhammad Ramzan petitioner No. 2 had given two Danda blows to Amjad Khan complainant but it has significantly been noticed by me that the seats of the injuries allegedly caused by both the present petitioners had not been mentioned in the F.I.R. The present petitioners were not directly connected with the motive set up in the F.I.R. The report submitted under Section 173, Cr.P.C, shows that Muhammad Ashraf petitioner No. 1 had been found to be innocent and nothing had been recovered from his possession, it had been found by the Investigating Agency that petitioner No. 1 is a crippled person and he was physically incapable of launching an assault upon anybody. As regards Muhammad Ramzan petitioner No. 2 it had been found by the Investigating Agency that the occurrence in hand had been initiated by the complainant party itself and petitioner No. 2 was not present at the scene at the initial stages but he was attracted to the spot when Muhammad Ashraf petitioner No. 1 was teased by the complainant party and thereafter both the parties had fought with each other. Muhammad Ramzan petitioner No. 2 was also found to have suffered three injuries on his person including some on his vital parts of the body but his injuries had been completely suppressed in the F.I.R. A private complaint has already been instituted by the accused party of this case against the complainant party advancing its on. Version of the alleged incident.
The challan in this case has already been submitted after completion of investigation and, thus, continued custody of the petitioners in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
Two of the co- accused of the present petitioners namely Muhammad Saleem and Muhammad Yousaf have already admitted to post-arrest bail by this Court.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioners calls for further inquiry into their guilt within the purview of sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.
50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount t6 the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.