Naseer Ahmad Alias Nasri vs The State
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, who is accused in FIR No. 447/2005 for offences under sections 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question is whether the petitioner is entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail given the specific allegations of firearm injuries attributed to him, his status as a proclaimed offender, and his presence at the scene of the crime. The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to pre-arrest bail because he is specifically named in the FIR, the medical evidence corroborates the injuries sustained by the victim, and his own injuries confirm his presence and participation in the occurrence. Furthermore, the court noted that the petitioner is required for investigation and has been declared a proclaimed offender. The key principle laid down is that where an accused is specifically named in an FIR with a distinct role, and medical evidence supports the prosecution's version, pre-arrest bail is not warranted, particularly when the accused is a proclaimed offender.
- Is an accused entitled to pre-arrest bail when specifically named in the FIR with a distinct role in causing firearm injuries?
- Does the presence of injuries on the accused during an occurrence establish their participation in the crime?
- Can a proclaimed offender be granted pre-arrest bail?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J. -Seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 447/2005 for the offence under sections 324/148/149, PPC registered at Police Station, Lundianwala, District Faisalabad.
2. Precise allegation against the petitioner is that at the relevant time he was armed with repeater (gun), whereas his co-accused were also armed with different kind of fire-arms and Sotas etc., in furtherance of their common intention while forming an unlawful assembly launched an attack and made indiscriminate firing. Allegedly the fire made by the petitioner hit Najum-ul-Hassan on the right thigh near the knee, on the shin and on the back of the right legal.
Bail application of the petitioner was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala vide order dated 02.05.2006, hence this petition.
3. Bail is sought on the grounds that during this occurrence petitioner also received multiple injuries and the complainant party with the connivance of the police while distorting the facts got registered the present case showing that the petitioner party was the aggressor. Further submits that cross-version of the case was also brought on the record but with the mala fide intention the same has been removed from the file of this case, it is submitted that it was the complainant party which had aggressed. Submits that petitioner never caused any injury to Najum-ul-Hassan (PW) and the injuries were manufactured later on just to falsely involve the petitioner and his co- accused in this case, it is further submitted that it was a night time occurrence and the identification of the assailants was hot possible. Lastly argued that in the circumstances petitioner is entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. Conversely counsel for the State vehemently opposes the bail application.
4. Petitioner is named in the FIR with the specific role of causing fire arm injuries to Najum-ul- Hassan. The Medico legal report of Najam-ul-Hassan reveals that he had three fire-arm injuries 0n his person as. Narrated in the FIR and the duration of these injuries also tallies with the time of occurrence. No doubt, as it is apparent from the record that petitioner had also received injuries during the occurrence but these injuries establish his presence at the spot as well as his participation in the occurrence. Petitioner is very much required by the agency for further investigation who has' already been declared as proclaimed .Offender. No ground for bail is made out. This petition stands dismissed with the direction to the agency to bring on record the cross- version of the petitioner as well and proceed with the matter strictly in accordance with law". Ad interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner was order dated 07.07.2006 stands withdrawn.