QAISER WASEEM vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 467 of 2007 registered under sections 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, with section 302 subsequently added following the death of the injured victim. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given his specific nomination in the F.I.R., the attribution of a specific role causing injuries, recovery of the weapon, applicability of the prohibitory clause, and his status as a fugitive from law for over a month. The Lahore High Court held that the petition was meritless, noting that the petitioner was specifically named with a role in the assault, supported by medical evidence and recovery, fell within the prohibitory clause, and had absconded. The court dismissed the bail petition, affirming that a deeper appreciation of evidence is unjustified when the trial is already in progress and the charge has been framed.
- Is an accused specifically named in the F.I.R. with a specific role in a murder case entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does an offence falling within the prohibitory clause disentitle an accused to bail when coupled with abscondence?
- Can a deeper appreciation of evidence be undertaken at the bail stage while the trial is already in progress?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' HASNAT AHMAD KHAN, J.----Through this application Qaiser Waseem alias Muthoo-petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,467 of 2007, dated 6-8-2007 registered at Police Station Model Town, Gujranwala, in respect of offences under sections 324/148/149, P.P.C. Later on due to the death of Asad Ismail, section 302, P.P.C. Was also added.
2. Precise allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. Is that on 5-8-2007 at 10-30 p.m. He along with Zohaib, Kamran and Javed caused injuries to the brother of complainant, Asad Ismail, who later on succumbed to his injuries on 23-8-2007. During the occurrence Umar Ilyas and Ali Nauman, P. Ws. Were also roughed up by the accused persons.
3. After hearing the arguments put forth by the learned counsel for both the sides I have gathered that the petitioner has been specifically named in the F.I.R., with a specific role of causing injuries on the head of Ali, injured P.W. During the investigation the weapon of offence i.e, pistol, which was used as a blunt weapon was duly recovered from the accused. The medico-legal certificate supports the case of the prosecution. At this stage there is A nothing on the record to suggest that the petitioner did not share common intention with his co-accused who committed murder of Asad, brother of the complainant. The offence allegedly committed by the petitioner falls within the prohibitory clause. It has further been brought to my notice that the petitioner remained fugitive from law for more than a month. Admittedly the charge has already been framed and the trial is in progress. At this stage deeper appreciation of evidence would not be justifiable. Therefore, the petition in hand being found meritless is dismissed.