KALEEM ABBAS vs THE STATE And Another
This criminal petition concerns an application for post-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, who is accused in a case registered under Sections 302, 364, 109, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner sought bail on grounds including a three-day delay in the registration of the First Information Report (F.I.R.), the absence of eye-witnesses, reliance on an alleged extra-judicial confession, and the fact that a co-accused had been granted bail. The State opposed the application, highlighting that the weapon of offense (a pistol), the motorcycle used in the crime, and the deceased's body were all recovered at the petitioner's instance. The Court held that these recoveries established a prima facie connection between the petitioner and the commission of the crime. Consequently, the Court dismissed the bail petition, affirming that the incriminating recoveries outweighed the arguments regarding the delay in the F.I.R. and the lack of eye-witnesses at the bail stage.
- Does the recovery of a weapon and the deceased's body at the instance of an accused establish a prima facie connection to the crime for the purpose of bail?
- Can a bail petition be dismissed solely on the basis of incriminating recoveries despite a delay in the registration of the F.I.R.?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 364, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
JUDGMENT ORDER TARIQ JAVED, J.---The petitioner, through this petition, seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 230, dated 7-6-2008 registered under sections 302/ 364/109/34, P.P.C. At Police Station, Mian Channu District Khanewal.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there is delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R. Which has not been explained; that the petitioner has falsely been roped in the instant case; that there is no eye-witness and the petitioner-accused has been arrested only on basis of so- called extra judicial confession; that co-accused of the petitioner has been granted bail and that story of F.I.R. Belies on the face of it.
3. The learned DPG has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail on the ground that recoveries of pistol and motorcycle have been effected from the petitioner and the dead body of the deceased has been recovered on the pointation of the petitioner.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. The very fact that Motorcycle used in the alleged occurrence as well as weapon of offence and the dead body were recovered at his instance. It cannot be said that prima facie the petitioner is not connected in the commission of crime.
6. For what has been discussed above, this petition having no merits is dismissed.