MUSHT A Q AHMED vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 by the petitioner, Mushtaq Ahmed, who was accused of abduction and murder under Sections 365 and 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the lack of incriminating evidence connecting him to the alleged offenses, despite the recovery of a weapon from a co-accused. The Court observed that the complainant, the wife of the deceased, failed to provide a motive for why the victim's own mother, brother, and sister would abduct him. Furthermore, the investigation failed to recover any incriminating items from the petitioner, whereas a weapon was recovered from another co-accused, Malkoo. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case connecting the petitioner to the crime, thereby creating a case for further inquiry. Consequently, the Court granted post-arrest bail, emphasizing that the absence of evidence linking the accused to the offense warrants relief under the statutory provisions for further inquiry.
- Does the absence of evidence connecting an accused to the commission of an offense constitute a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can post-arrest bail be granted when the complainant fails to provide a plausible motive for the alleged abduction by close family members?
- Is the recovery of a weapon from a co-accused sufficient to deny bail to other accused persons against whom no incriminating evidence has been collected?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 365, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. Mushtaq Ahmed, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No,730 of 2006, dated 30-9-2006, registered under sections 365/302, P.P.C. At Police station Hanjarwal, Lahore on the application of Mst. Seema Bibi, the complainant.
2. The brief allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. Is that one month prior to lodging of the F.I.R., the petitioner along with co-accused had abducted Khadim Hussain, husband of the complainant and real brother of the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner and Riaz co-accused are real brothers, Mst. Sharifan Bibi co-accused is real mother. Mst. Sakina Bibi, is real sister and Ashraf brother-in-law of the alleged abductee; that no reason has been mentioned in the F.I.R. That why mother, brother and sister of the victim had abducted him; that the petitioner is behind the bars since 5-12-2006; that actually complainant and her paramour Malkoo had committed the murder of Khadim. Hussain (victim) and falsely implicated the petitioner and other in the present case, but no other evidence has been collected during the investigation to connect them with the commission of offence.
4. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General for the State has opposed this application on the ground that according to the police investigation offence under section 302, P.P.C. Has been added as pistol has been recovered fromco-accused and the dead body subsequently also recovered; that the offence falls within ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr. P. C .
5. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due care and caution.
6. The petitioner, his mother, sister and their brother-in-law have been involved in the present case by the complainant, wife of the deceased Khadim Hussain, but she did not disclose any reason for the abduction of the victim by the petitioner and his other relatives. On the other hand, the claim of the petitioner and other co-accused is that Mst. Seema Bibi, complainant/wife of the deceased in connivance with Malkoo had committed the murder of the deceased and got lodged this false case against the petitioner and his other family members in order to restrain them from lodging the murder case of Khadim Hussain against her. During the investigation, pistol was recovered from Malkoo co- A accused, but nothing mild be recovered from the petitioner and other co- accused nominated in the F.I.R. No evidence has been collected by the police against the petitioner and his other co-accused to prima facie connect them with the commission of murder of the deceased. In such circumstances, the petitioner has succeeded in making out a case of further inquiry falling under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
' For the foregoing reasons, the instant bail application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (J.) of this Court.