Azhar Hayat vs The State And Another
This matter arises from a petition for post-arrest bail filed in a criminal case registered under Sections 302, 324, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Chakrala, District Mianwali. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail on the grounds of further inquiry, delayed FIR, lack of recovery, and a plea of alibi supported by a police discharge report, alongside allegations of being a fugitive from law. The Lahore High Court dismissed the bail petition, holding that the petitioner is specifically nominated in the FIR, attributed with a firearm injury that contributed to the deceased's death, supported by injured and ocular witnesses, and had remained a fugitive from law for over five months warranting proceedings under Sections 87 and 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court laid down that a plea of alibi involving a short distance between locations cannot be accepted at the bail stage without trial evidence, and that a fugitive from law disentitles themselves from discretionary relief of bail when prima facie connected to an offense falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Whether a plea of alibi can be accepted at the bail stage when the distance between the scene of occurrence and the alleged place of presence is short and easily traversable?
- Does remaining a fugitive from law for a prolonged period disentitle an accused person to the concession of post-arrest bail?
- Is an accused specifically nominated in the FIR with a specific role and supported by injured witnesses connected to an offense falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 entitled to bail?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 87, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 88, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
RAUF AHMAD SHEIKH, J, - The petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 33, dated 1.6.2010 under Sections 302/324/34, P.P.C. Police Station Chakrala, Tehsil & Dirtrict Mianwali. Briefly stated the prosecution version is that the petitioner while armed with pistol alongwith his co-accused, who were also armed with pistols due to dispute regarding share in the hotel and desertion of their father's sister by the deceased made an attack on him. Ahmad Nawaz co-accused of the petitioner made first fire which hit the deceased below left shoulder. The petitioner made two fires which hit on his right thigh. Ahamd Nawaz made fire on Sikandar Hayat on his left upper arm.
Liaqat made a fire which also hit Sikandar Hayat on left upper arm.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner was present in village Chitral at the time of occurrence and large number of people have supported his contention before the investigating officer and his contention has been accepted by the I.O. Who had submitted the discharge report but was not accepted by the Court, so the case against him clearly needs further probe and inquiry. It is further urged that the petitioner had not' repeated the fire and no recovery was made from him, that there is delay of about nine hours in lodging the F.I.R. Which is not explained. In support of contentions raised reliance is placed on PLD 1998 SC 97, 1996 SCM R 931, 1975 SCM R 219, PLD 1978 SC 256 and PLD 1974 SC 83.
3. Learned D.P.G. And learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail petition. It is contended that the petitioner is specifically nominated in the F.I.R. And all the PWs including Sikandar Hayat injured have fully supported the prosecution version. It is urged that the petitioner remained fugitive from law for a period of more than five months and proceedings under Sections 87/88, Cr.P.C. Were taken against him. It is also urged that distance between village Chikrala and Chitral is only 45 kilometers and both these places are connected with metalled road so the statement of some persons that he was in village Chitral without mentioning the time does not prove his contention of alibi.
4. The petitioner is specifically nominated in the F.I.R. Allegedly he made a fire, which hit on the thigh of the deceased and this injury also contributed towards demise of the deceased. Admittedly the village Chitral and Chikrala are linked with metalled road and there is distance of 45 kilometers between two villages which can be easily covered after occurrence so the plea in the regard cannot be accepted unless the evidence is produced and appreciated by the Court. The petitioner had been fugitive from law. The injured PW Sikandar Hayat alongwith PWs Mian Aziz and Rafiullah had fully supported the prosecution version. In these circumstances the petitioner, prima facie, appears to be connected with the commission of offence falling under prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. No ground for grant of bail is available. The case-law cited at the bar is not applicable on peculiar facts of present petition. The bail petition is without merits and same is hereby dismissed.