MUHAMMAD AZAM vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a second application seeking post-arrest bail in respect of F.I.R. No. 237 of 2005 registered under sections 302, 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Liaqatabad, Lahore. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail on the rule of consistency when a co-accused facing similar allegations has already been granted bail, and whether the petitioner's conduct as a fugitive from law disentitles him to this relief. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner's case is indistinguishable from that of the co-accused whose case falls within the ambit of further inquiry, and consequently, the petitioner is entitled to bail as a matter of right notwithstanding his prior abscondence. The key principle laid down is that once an accused's case is found to fall within the scope of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, abscondence alone does not bar the grant of bail.
- Whether an accused whose case is identical to a co-accused already granted bail is entitled to bail on the rule of consistency?
- Does remaining a fugitive from law deprive an accused of bail when their case otherwise falls within the ambit of further inquiry?
- Is bail a matter of right once the case of an accused is held to fall within the scope of further inquiry?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAMUZ-ZAMAN, J.---This is second application seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,237 of 2005 dated 29-4-2005 (cross version) for the offence under sections 302/324/148/149 P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Liaqatabad, Lahore. Earlier bail application of the petitioner i.e, Criminal Miscellaneous No,7160-B of 2007 was withdrawn on 1-11-2007. Now this second application seeking post-arrest bail has been filed on the .Ground that case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the co-accused namely Abbas Ali who has already been admitted to bail by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No,866-B of 2006 vide order dated 1-3- 2006.
' Learned Addl. P.G. After going through the record candidly conceded to the proposition laid down by learned counsel for the petitioner but added that petitioner remained fugitive from law for a couple of months and to this extent case of the petitioner is distinguishable from the case of said co-accused.
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I have observed that on the factual aspect, case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from the co-accused namely Abbas Ali who has already been admitted to bail by this Court because his case was covered, within the ambit of further inquiry. Learned Addl. P.G. While opposing the application has argued that since petitioner had remained fugitive from law for a couple of months, he is not entitled for any discretionary relief. But I am afraid this contention has no force because once it is held that case of the petitioner falls within the ambit of further inquiry, then as a matter of right he is entitled to the concession of bail and said conduct of the petitioner could not be treated as a hurdle in the grant of said relief. Accordingly while allowing this petition, it is directed that petitioner shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds amounting to Rs,100,000 (rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of D.R. (Judicial) of this Court.