ADEEL IQBAL vs THE STATE and another
This is a criminal petition through which the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case registered under sections 302, 324, 109, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question is whether the petitioner is entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail given the allegations of a coordinated attack resulting in murder and firearm injuries, coupled with his status as a fugitive from law for over three months. The Lahore High Court dismissed the bail petition, holding that the petitioner was well-nominated with a specific role, the Medico-Legal Report corroborated the FIR, the offence fell within the prohibitory clause, and the petitioner had remained a fugitive from law. The key principle laid down is that an accused who remains a fugitive from law and is nominated with a specific role in a heinous offence falling within the prohibitory clause is not entitled to post-arrest bail.
- Whether an accused who remained a fugitive from law for a significant period is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does a specific role attributed to an accused in a murder case involving the prohibitory clause warrant the refusal of bail?
- Whether contradictions between an FIR and a Medico-Legal Report make a case one of further inquiry when core allegations are corroborated?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ, J.---This is a second bail petition through which the petitioner seeks his bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,686 of 2009, dated 17-12-2009, for the offences under sections 302, 324, 109, 148, 149, P.P.C., registered with Police Station Bhera, District Sargodha.
2. 2.The precise allegation against the petitioner is that on the day of occurrence, he along with his co-accused attacked on the complainant party in their baithak and as a result Nazar Hayat died while Noor Hayat and Sarfraz were injured by fire-arms injuries.
3. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner has been malafidely implicated in the case by the complainant with active connivance of the local police because of previous enmity between the parties. Investigation of the case has since been completed, the petitioner is no more required for any further investigation. Learned counsel avers that the contents of F.I.R. are not in line with the Medico-Legal Report (MLR), as such, the case against the petitioner is of further inquiry. Even otherwise, maximum charge against the petitioner could be levelled under section 337-F(iii), P.P.C. The petitioner is behind the bars since 31-3-2010. In the circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail.
4. 4.Conversely, learned District Public Prosecutor assisted by Mr. Javed Iqbal, Advocate for the complainant and Ghulam Rasool, S.I. has vehemently opposed this bail petition and has contended that the previous bail petitions filed on the same set of grounds was withdrawn by the learned counsel for the petitioner on 30-7-2010 after arguing his case at considerable length and in this petition, no fresh ground has been agitated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, the bail petition be dismissed.
5. 5.Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. 6.According to the contents of F.I.R., the petitioner fired at Noor Hayat with .12 bore gun which hit him on his left arm. Admittedly, the place of occurrence is the baithak of the complainant where the petitioner along with his co-accused attacked on the complainant party and as a result, Nazar Hayat died while Noor Hayat and Sarfraz were injured. The petitioner is well-nominated in the F.I.R. with specific role. The place of occurrence is admitted. The contents of F.I.R. are in line with the Medico-Legal Report. The occurrence had taken place on 17-12-2009 while the petitioner was arrested on 31-3-2010 who remained fugitive of law for more than three months. The challan of the case has already been sent to the trial court on 10-4-2010. There is no cavil that the allegation against the petitioner is that he fired at Noor Hayat which hit him on his left arm but it does not bring the case out of prohibitory clause as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in case reported as 2008 SCM R 1436. The petitioner has committed a heinous offence and the P.Ws. have implicated the petitioner in their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. recorded by the police during investigation. In the circumstances, no case of further inquiry or bail is made out.
7. 7.The outcome of the above discussion is that this criminal miscellaneous petition has no force, hence dismissed.