LAL BUX vs THE STATE
The applicant sought post-arrest bail in respect of Crime No. 343 of 2007 registered under sections 353, 324, 186, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Shahra-e-Noor Jahan, following an alleged police encounter. The core legal question was whether the applicant made out a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Sindh High Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail because no police personnel sustained injuries in the alleged encounter and no private persons were cited as witnesses despite the incident occurring near a marriage hall at night, with no explanation offered by the prosecution. The court laid down the principle that the absence of injuries to law enforcement personnel and the failure to associate available private witnesses in an alleged encounter case can bring the matter within the scope of further inquiry, warranting the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Whether the absence of injuries to police personnel in an alleged encounter warrants further inquiry for the grant of bail?
- Does the failure to associate private witnesses near the scene of an alleged crime make the case one of further inquiry?
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when no challan has been submitted within four months and circumstances point towards further inquiry?
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 186, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
1. ' AGHA RAFIQ AHMED KHAN, J.---Applicant/accused was arrested on 10-9-2007 at night between 9- 9-2007 and 10-9-2007 by Police Station Shahra-e-Noor Jahan. Allegations as stated in the F.I.R. Are that he along with two other persons was going on motorcycle at about 2245 hours in the night when they reached near the Sky Marriage Hall, Police challenged them for checking purpose but they started firing on the police party. Police party also fired upon them one bullet hit to Muhammad Khurram who died on the spot and present applicant was arrested along with T.T.
2. Pistol and three live bullets. Police registered case being Crime No,343 of 2007 under sections 353/324/186/34, P.P.C.
3. ' Ms. Abida Parveen Channer, Advocate has argued that though the incident is said to have taken place near the Marriage Hall at 10.45 p.m. But no private person has been made witness. She has further argued that in the alleged encounter no injury has been received by the police personnel and more than 4 months have passed no challan has been submitted by the police.
4. ' Mr. Muhammad Qasim Mirjat, A.A.-G. Has opposed the bail application.
5. ' I have given full consideration to the arguments and have examined the material available on record. Admittedly no police personnel has received injury in the alleged encounter and no private person has been made witness though the Marriage Hall was very near to the place of incident. No explanation to that effect is available in police record.
6. ' Looking to these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the case requires further inquiry, therefore, applicant is entitled for grant of bail. Bail is granted to the applicant subject to furnishing 'surety in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Cited by 4 cases
- Daim vs The State 2023 SHC 399
- Nakeef son of Suhrab Nindwani vs The State 2020 SHC 1086
- NAKEEF Versus State 2021 YLRN 104
- ASHFAQ KAREEM alias KHALIL-UR-REHMAN vs THE STATE 2009 P Cr. L J 679