MIANDAD vs THE STATE
This matter concerns an application for pre-arrest bail filed by the applicant, Miandad, in connection with a criminal case registered under various sections of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, including sections 324, 337-A(ii), 147, 148, 149, 114, 504, and 337-F(i). The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to pre-arrest bail, considering the nature of the injury attributed to him and the fact that co-accused had already been granted interim pre-arrest bail. The applicant contended that the injury attributed to him, Shajjah-i-Khafifa, fell under section 337-A(i) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which is bailable. The State did not oppose the bail application following the final medical report. The Court held that the applicant's case stood on a better footing than that of the co-accused, noting the nature of the injury and the existence of past enmity between the parties. Consequently, the Court confirmed the pre-arrest bail, emphasizing the principle that parity of treatment should be considered when co-accused have been granted relief under similar circumstances.
- Is an offence under section 337-A(i) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 bailable?
- Does the principle of parity apply when considering pre-arrest bail for an applicant whose co-accused have already been granted interim relief?
- Section 498, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 114, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 504, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' MRS, QAISER IQBAL, J.---Applicant Miandad son of Arab Bajeer has applied for pre-arrest bail under section 498, Cr.P.C. In crime No,2 of 2006 under sections 324, 337-A(ii), 147, 148, 149, 114, 504, 337-F(i), P.P.C. Registered at Police Station, Chachro.
2. ' Precisely the facts leading to the bail application are that complainant Arab son of Dodo Bajeer lodged report that there existed dispute with one Inayat, therefore, their families were not on visiting terms. On 4th March, 2006 in the evening there was marriage ceremony in the house of Inayat, applicant Miandad along with the co-accused Hameer and Karim had resorted to give invitation to the complainant, he declined to attend the marriage. In the evening of fateful day while complainant party was sitting in front of the shop of Abdul Razak, applicant Miandad duly armed with hatchet along with his associates abused the complainant party and on instigation of Inayat, applicant caused direct hatchet blow on the head of Abdul Razak, while Inayat also caused lathi blow on his head, who fell down. Matter was rescued on the intervention of co-villagers, ' Mr. Mumtaz Alam Leghari, learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the injury No,2 over the head of the Abdul Razak is attributed to the applicant, has been declared as Shajjah-i- Khafifa, fell under section 337-A(i), P.P.C. Punishable with imprisonment of two years and is bailable in nature. It is further contended that co-accused Abdul Karim, Inayatullah and Jiando were admitted on interim pre-arrest by the trial Court on the premises that there existed enmity between the parties and final medical certificate was not issued by the Medico Legal Officer.
3. ' Mr. Tahir, learned counsel for the State did not oppose the grant of bail in favour of the applicant on account of final Medico Legal Report issued by Senior Medical Officer, Taluka Hospital, Chachro as well as the opinion of the Medical Board that certificate issued by Senior Medical Officer in respect of injured Abdul Razak is correct.
4. I have considered the arguments advanced at the bar. It appears that the case of the applicant is on better footing to that of co-accused, who were admitted on interim pre-arrest by the Sessions Judge, Tharparkar at Mithi, injury attributed to the applicant caused to the victim has been declared as Shajjah-i-Khafifa, there existed past enmity between the parties on petty affairs, which resulted in registration of the case against the applicant.
5. ' In view of the above circumstances, the applicant is admitted on pre-arrest bail on the same terms and conditions as are contained in interim pre-arrest bail order, dated 22nd March, 2006.