UMAR HAYAT and 2 otherss vs THE STATE and another
This matter arises from a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the petitioners in relation to case F.I.R. No. 154 registered under sections 302, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Ghazi Abad, wherein the petitioners were accused of launching a firearm attack resulting in the death of the deceased, Riaz. The core legal question is whether the petitioners are entitled to post-arrest bail in the absence of specific weapon recovery and attributed injuries, coupled with established prior animosity. The Lahore High Court held that since no specific injury or weapon recovery was attributed to the petitioners and the sole fatal injury was assigned to a co-accused, coupled with admitted previous enmity rendering false involvement plausible, the case fell within the purview of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court established the key principle that pre-trial incarceration without reasonable grounds for an indefinite period amounts to pre-trial punishment, warranting the grant of bail.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when no specific injury or weapon recovery is attributed to the accused in a murder case?
- Does prior animosity between parties create a ground for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is prolonged incarceration without the commencement of trial considered pre-trial punishment justifying the grant of bail?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' MALIK SA EED EJAZ, J.---Petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,154 dated 19-7-2008 under sections 302, 148, 149, P.P.C. Police Station Ghazi Abad.
2. Allegation against the petitioners is that they along with co-accused Zakir, etc. Launched attack upon Riaz deceased with fire arms.
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that although they are named in the F.I.R., but no weapon of offence has been recovered from them and that even no role is attributed to them.
4. Conversely, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant opposed this petition by arguing that another F.I.R. Was also got lodged against the petitioner by Jehangir under section 324, P.P .C. For causing injuries to Mansha, Ghulam Mustafa, and others and this is second attempt for murder of Riaz, therefore, presence of the petitioners at the scene of occurrence is established.
5. Heard, Record perused.
6. It is admitted fact that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. But no specific injury is attributed to either of them. The medical report also shows that only one injury was sustained by Riaz deceased and said injury is attributed to Zakir co-accused. It is not controverted that no weapon was recovered from the petitioners. Enmity inter se the parties is established from the fact that earlier also, an F.I.R. Had been lodged by Jehangir against Gul A Sher and others for causing injuries to Mansha and Ghulam Mustafa. In view of the prior animosity between the parties, false involvement of the petitioners in the instant case cannot be ruled out, especially when neither any injury is attributed to them nor any recovery has been effected from them. As such, case against the petitioner is squarely covered by section 497(2) Cr .P.C. Furthermore, they are behind the bars for quite some long and their confinement in jail for an indefinite period without trial, would amount to punishing them before trial, which is neither the mandate nor spirit of law. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and A petitioners are admitted to bail On their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.