ABDUL RAZZAQUE Versus THE STATE
This matter concerns a bail application filed by two accused persons, Abdul Razzaque and Hanif Shah, who were charged in connection with a robbery involving the theft of Rs. 1,600,000. The core legal question was whether, given the lack of incriminating evidence, the applicants were entitled to post-arrest bail under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The prosecution's case relied primarily on suspicion and an inadmissible confession made to the police. The court observed that the confession was inadmissible, no recovery of stolen property or weapons was made from the applicants, and the identification parade procedures were flawed or not conducted for one of the applicants. Consequently, the court held that there were no reasonable grounds to believe the applicants were guilty of the offence at this stage. The court determined that the case fell within the scope of further inquiry, entitling the applicants to bail. The key principle laid down is that where the prosecution lacks sufficient connecting evidence, such as recoveries or valid identification, the case warrants further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail.
- Is a confession made before a police officer admissible as evidence to deny bail?
- Does the absence of recovery of stolen property or weapons justify the grant of bail?
- When does a criminal case fall within the scope of 'further inquiry' under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J.- Heard. Messrs Muhammad Yaseen, Advocate for the applicants, Hanif Shah and Abdul Razaak, and Mr. Fazlur Rahman Aw an, State counsel. The latter opposes bail only on -the ground that a big amount Rs, 16,00,000 was allegedly robbed in the incident. Briefly, the facts are that on 27-3-2007,1 at 1300 hours, near Tyre Company, on MT Khan Road, Karachi four robbers robbed, on gun-point, cash of Rs, 16,00,000 from complainant Muhammad Ibrahim, cashier in A1 Karam Textile Limited Group. He had obtained the cash from Metro Bank Main Branch and was taking to their office. Applicant Abdul Razak was driving the car while Ilyas Bhai, a trustee of the company, was also sitting with him in the ear. Four robbers, armed with pistQls, riding two motorcycles, chased and intercepted them on MT Khan Road and robbed the cash on gun-point.
2. ' Complainant Muhammad Ibrahim reported the matter to police of 'Police Station Jaxon on the same day as 1715 hours stating that he suspected applicant Abdul Razak, driver of the car, to be mixed with the robbers. On the basis of complainant's suspicion applicant Abdul Razak was arrested on the same day. He allegedly confessed as guilt before the police and stated that at his instance applicant Hanif Shah, co-accused Arif Shah, absconding accused Mukhtiar and Shiraz had committed the robbery.
3. ' Applicant, Hanif Shah and coaccused Arif Shah, both brothers inter se, were arrested on 30-3-2007 but only Arif Shah was produced before the Magistrate for holding an identification parade.
4. ' Besides, out of the two eye-witnesses only one, namely, complainant Muhammad Ibrahim was asked to identify him, while the other, namely, Ilyas Bhai was not Called for the purpose of identification.
5. ' Mr. Fazalur Rahman, learned State Counsel, concedes that statement of applicant Abdul Razak before the Investigating Officer is inadmissible in evidence and, therefore, except for complainant's suspicion regarding applicant Abdul Razzak, there is no evidence to connect the applicants with the commission of the crime. He states that applicant Hanif Shah was not put to the identification of the eye-witnesses and no recovery, either of the stolen property or of any weapon, is shown to have been made from the applicants. In such circumstances, it cannot be said that there are reasonable grounds to believe them guilty of the offence. The matter requires only further inquiry as contemplated by subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and the applicant are entitled to bail. Accordingly, the applicants are directed to be released on bail each on giving one surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 and personal bond in the like amount to the trial Court.