MUHAMMAD HANIF vs THE STATE and another
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicants, Muhammad Hanif, Nazar Muhammad, and Abbas, who were charged in an F.I.R. registered under Section 302, 34, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of Raja Muhammad Ashraf. The core legal question was whether the applicants were entitled to bail given the nature of the allegations and the findings of the police investigation. The Court held that the applicants were entitled to bail, noting that the allegation of a criminal conspiracy hatched in a public shop was inherently doubtful and contrary to common experience. Furthermore, the Court observed that the police investigation report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 had declared two of the applicants innocent. Emphasizing that the case required further inquiry into the guilt of the accused, the Court invoked the principle under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the bail applications were accepted, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds, with the clarification that these observations were tentative and would not prejudice the trial.
- Does an allegation of criminal conspiracy hatched in a public place warrant further inquiry for the purpose of bail?
- Is the police opinion regarding the innocence of an accused, as recorded in a report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, a relevant circumstance for granting bail?
- When does a case fall under the scope of Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 regarding further inquiry?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN, J.---Applicant Muhammad Hanif through an application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No,3132-B of 2009, has sought for post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,158 registered under section 302 read with section 34/109, P.P.C. With Police Station Gaggoo, District Vehari on 3- 4-2009.
2. Applicants Nazar Muhammad and Abbas through a separate application bearing Criminal Miscellaneous No,3249-B of 2009, have also sought for the same relief in the said case.
3. As both these applications are outcome of one and the same case, hence are being disposed of by this single order.
4. Briefly the allegation against applicants Nazar Muhammad and Muhammad Hanif is that they were party to the criminal conspiracy to do away with deceased Raja Muhammad Ashraf and against Abbas of raising Lalkara at the time of occurrence.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that the role ascribed to applicants Nazar Muhammad and Muhammad Hanif is that they had hatched up conspiracy in the shop of latter (Muhammad Hanif) situated in the bazaar of the village to do away with the deceased.
6. The manner of hatching up of such conspiracy, as described in the F.I.R., ex facie is not appealing to reason as it is not commonly done B so in presence of other persons.
7. I may say here that it is a matter of common experience and observation that to conspire to murder someone is done in most careful manner and secretly and not so openly that other people may hear it very easily. So, this sort of allegation, somewhat, is not only strange but also not above doubt. I would avoid to dilate any further upon this aspect of the matter here, lest it may be prejudicial to any of the parties at any subsequent stage to come in the case.
8. As regards applicant Abbas, he has been ascribed only proverbial Lalkara at the time of occurrence and no overt act qua the deceased.
9. Not only this, the learned DPG has informed that Muhammad Ayaz Khan, S.-I., in this case Diary No,27 recorded on 30-5-2009, has mentioned that applicants Nazar Muhammad and Abbas are innocent persons, whereas the allegation of hatching up conspiracy in the shop of Muhammad Hanif, in the investigation has not been found to correct. He in the report prepared under section 173, Cr.P.C. Has placed the names of Nazar Muhammad and Abbas in Column No,2 of the same finding them innocent, whereas the Muhammad Hanif left to the mercy of the Court. It may be mentioned here that although the opinion of the police is not binding upon Court yet it is a relevant circumstance to be taken into consideration, while deciding the question of bail, particularly, in view of the above referred peculiar circumstances, of the case.
10. All these facts, when seen together, the same definitely leave room for further inquiry into the guilt of all these applicants. Their case, therefore, is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Calling for further inquiry into their guilt.
11. They statedly are behind the bars since 12-5-2009 and no likelihood of their absconsion has been shown by the side of prosecution.
12. In these circumstances, I find that the case for their enlargement on bail has been made out. I, therefore, accept both these bail applications and admit them to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
13. However, it is hereby clarified that the above observations are tentative in nature and meant only for the disposal of the matter in hand. These shall have no baring at all on anybody's case at trial.