MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR vs THE STATE
This matter involves two separate petitions for post-arrest bail filed by Muhammad Jahangir and Abdul Rehman, who were implicated in a criminal case registered under sections 302, 324, 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 148, 149, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question concerned whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given the specific allegations and evidence presented against them. Regarding Muhammad Jahangir, the court held that his bail petition should be dismissed because he was specifically nominated in the First Information Report for causing a fatal firearm injury, which was corroborated by statements of injured witnesses recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Conversely, the court granted bail to Abdul Rehman, noting that the injury attributed to him fell under section 337-A(i) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which does not attract the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court emphasized that the determination of vicarious liability for the latter petitioner was a matter to be resolved during the trial, and his prolonged incarceration justified the grant of bail.
- Does a specific allegation of causing a fatal firearm injury corroborated by witness statements preclude the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Does an offence under section 337-A(i) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can prolonged incarceration justify the grant of bail for an accused whose vicarious liability is yet to be determined at trial?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' M. BILAL KHAN, J.-- Muhammad Jahangir son of Mushtaq Ahmed and Abdul Rehman son of Din Muhammad, the petitioners by filing Criminal Miscellaneous Nos.7374/B and 7642/B of 2005, respectively seek post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,139 dated 23-3-2005, registered at Police Station Saddar Pakpattan Sharif for offences under sections 302, 324, 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 148 and 149 read with section 109, P.P.C., at the instance of Muhammad Akram son of Bashir Ahmed, paternal cousin of Khizar Hayat deceased. I propose to dispose of both these matters together through this single order.
2. Since the facts of the case have already been given in detail in my order of even dated passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,6802/CB of 2005, whereby pre-arrest bail granted to Abdul Majeed and Asadullah, co-accused of the petitioners, has been cancelled, therefore, the same need not be reiterated here once again.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record brought by Muhammad Hassan S.-I.
4. Insofar as the allegation against Muhammad Jahangir (petitioner) is concerned, he has been nominated in the F.I.R, with a specific role of causing firearm injury on the person of Khizar Hayat, which proved fatal. The contention of the learned counsel appearing on his behalf that some other person had killed Khizar Hayat and not Muhammad Jahangir (petitioner), does not carry any weight in the presence of the statements of the injured P.Ws, recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C, wherein they resolutely stick to their stance as contained in the F.I.R, prima facie, there is ample incriminating material available on the record connecting him with the crime imputed to him.
Accordingly, there being no merit in the bail petition bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No,7374/B of 2005, the same is dismissed.
5. As regards Abdul Rehman (petitioner), he has been assigned the role of firstly catching hold of the complainant by his collar and then causing a blow with the butt of his .32 bore revolver on the back of his head. The other allegation against him was that he had been raising Lalkaras that no Gujjar may be allowed to escape from the scene. Thus it would be seen that the injury attributed to Abdul Rehman petitioner was Injury No,2 recorded in the medico-legal report of Muhammad Akram (the complainant), which had been declared to be falling within the purview of section 337- A(i), P.P.C, and it does not' attract the prohibitory clause of section 497(i), Cr.P.C. He is in custody for the last more than ten months and the trial has yet not concluded. His vicarious liability needs to be thrashed out during the course of trial.
6. Resultantly, bail application bearing Criminal Misc. No,7642/B of 2005 is allowed and Abdul Rehman (petitioner) is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.