EJAZ AHMED alias JAJJI vs STATE
This criminal petition concerns a request for post-arrest bail by the petitioner, Ejaz Ahmed alias Jajji, in a case involving offences under Sections 324, 337-F(iii), 337-F(vi), 341, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, and Section 11-B of the Arms Ordinance 1965. The petitioner had previously sought bail, which was dismissed by the High Court and subsequently withdrawn before the Supreme Court, with liberty granted to approach the High Court again at an appropriate stage. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given the evidence on record. The Court held that the petitioner was named in the F.I.R. with a specific role attributed to him, supported by medical evidence and the recovery of the weapon of offence. Finding that the offence under Section 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the Court dismissed the bail petition on merits, directing the trial court to conclude proceedings expeditiously.
- Does an offence under Section 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can a bail petition be dismissed on merits when the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and the weapon of offence has been recovered?
- Is the High Court justified in refusing post-arrest bail where the trial is already in progress and the charge has been framed?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(vi), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 341, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 11-B, Arms Ordinance 1965
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Through this petition, the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 429 dated 07.07.2006 for offences under Sections 324. 337-F(iii), 337-F(vi), 341, 148 and 149 P.P.C. and Section 11-B of the Arms Ordinance, registered at Police Station Saddar Samundri, District Faisalabad.
2. The petitioner's bail application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 09.04.2007 which was assailed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan through Crl. Petition No, 315L/2007 but the same was withdrawn as not pressed on 03.07.2007. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred another bail petition Bearing No, 6758-B/2007 which was dismissed by this Court as the grounds urged by the petitioner had already been considered if the earlier order. This order was also assailed by the petitioner before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan through Crl.
Petition No, 513-L of 2007 in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan observed as under:-- The learned counsel when confronted that in the given situation the interference of this Court is not justified at this stage he without further pressing this petition submitted that petitioner may be permitted to repeat his request of bail before the High Court at appropriate stage."
2. In view thereof we without commenting upon the merits of the case, dismiss this petition as not pressed with the observation that the petitioner may, if so desires, approach the High Court afresh at appropriate stage and if a bail application is moved by him before the High Court, the same shall be decided on its own merits without being influenced by the earlier order passed by the High Court or this order.
3. In view of the above order, the instant petition is again being decided on merits:
4. It has been observed that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and specific role has been ascribed to him of causing injury on the outer side of right thigh of Abdul Ghafoor, the injured prosecution witness. Thus, to the extent of injury caused by the petitioner, the medico-legal report is in consonance with the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. The injured and the eye-witnesses of the occurrence have fully implicated the petitioner in the crime and have furnished an account which is in line with the contents of the F.I.R. During investigation, weapon of offence was also recovered from the petitioner which further connects him with the prosecution case. Since prima facie offence under Section 324 P.P.C. is attracted in the case, therefore, the offence squarely falls within the ambit of the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. It is pertinent to add here that during investigation the petitioner was found to be fully involved in the crime and consequently, challan has been submitted in the trial Court. After framing of charge against the accused, the trial is in progress.
5. For what has been discussed above, the petitioner has failed to make out a case for grant of bail.
Consequently, this petition is DISMISSED being without merit. Since charge in the case has been framed and trial proceedings are in progress, therefore, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial without loss of unnecessary time and preferably within three months.