MUHAMMAD HANIF alias TANGO vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the accused, Muhammad Hanif alias Tango, who was arrested following an alleged police encounter involving an exchange of fire. The prosecution alleged that 1500 grams of charas and a 9 mm pistol were recovered from the applicant, leading to charges under Sections 324, 353, 186, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, alongside offences under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to post-arrest bail given the nature of the allegations, specifically the claim of ineffective firing where no injuries were sustained by the police party or civilians. The Court held that, in light of the ineffective firing and the absence of independent witnesses to the recovery, the case against the applicant required further inquiry. Consequently, the Court allowed the bail application, ruling that the applicant's role needed to be determined at trial. The key principle laid down is that where an alleged police encounter results in no injuries and lacks independent corroboration of recovery, the case warrants further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail pending trial.
- Does an allegation of ineffective firing during a police encounter constitute grounds for further inquiry in a bail application?
- Is bail appropriate when no injuries were sustained by the police party or civilians during an alleged encounter?
- Does the absence of private witnesses to an alleged recovery of narcotics and weapons justify the grant of bail?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 186, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 6, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
' SALMAN ANSARI, J.---This bail application has been moved on behalf of applicant/accused who was on 26-7-2008 at about 1030 hours arrested by the police personnel of Lyari Town, Police Station Bughdadi. After exchange of firing 1500 grams of charas from the applicant and a 9 mm pistol were recovered with 7 empties of 9 m.m. Pistol and 3 empties of T.T. Pistol and remaining empties of government weapons used by the police were recovered from the spot, hence a case under sections 324/353/186/34, P.P.C. was made out against the applicant who was subsequently granted bail by the learned Special A Judge, CNS-II, Karachi fbr the offence punishable under section 6/9(c) of CNS Act, 1997 vide order dated 7-10-2008.
2. Learned counsel for applicant has argued that this is a case of ineffective firing and this court has been pleased to grant bail where no injury was sustained by any police personnal of the police party or by any other person of the locality. The applicant has been granted bail in the connected case and the circumstances where no private person was associated with alleged recovery, hence the case of made out of further enquiry to determine the role played by the applicant who is falsely implicated in his case. In support of his contention the learned counsel for applicant has placed reliance in the case of Wadero Ghulam Hyder v. The State (1994 PCr.LJ 1772) and Abdul Ghafoor v.
The State (1996 PCr.LJ 1573).
3. Learned Additional Prosecutor-General has opposed this bail application on the ground that after encounter the applicant was apprehended and recovery as mentioned above was effected from the applicant.
4. Under the circumstances where ineffective firing is alleged, and relying upon the case law cited, matter would require further enquiry to determine the role actually played in the present case.
Accordingly, this bail application is allowed. The applicant be released subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs, 100,000 and execution P.R. Bond in the like amount to satisfaction of the trial Court.