This petition for leave to appeal was filed against the order of the Lahore High Court refusing post-arrest bail to the petitioner in a murder case registered under sections 302, 109, 148, and 149 PPC. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail on the ground of further inquiry. The Supreme Court of Pakistan observed that the FIR attributed only a general lalkara and collective firing to the petitioner without specifying any injury, no weapon was recovered, and the investigating officer determined that he was unarmed and had caused no injury. Given deep-seated prior enmity between the parties, the court noted the possibility of false implication to spread the net wide. Furthermore, as investigation was complete, his physical custody was no longer required. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, and granted bail under section 497(2) Cr.P.C., holding that where an accused is found unarmed, attributed no specific injury, and faced with potential false involvement due to enmity, the case falls within further inquiry.
' ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---Through this petition Subeh Sadiq alias Saabo alias Kalu petitioner has sought leave to appeal against the order dated 26-4-2011 passed by a learned Judge-in- Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No, 2846-B of 2011 whereby post-arrest bail was refused to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No,13 registered at Police Station Mustafa Abad, District Kasur on 7-1-2011 in respect of offences under sections 302/ 109/148/149, P.P.C.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Prosecutor- General, Punjab appearing for the State and have gone through the record of this case with their assistance.
3. According to the prosecution the petitioner had raised a lalkara and then, collectively with his co-accused, he had fired at the deceased. No specific fire or injury stands attributed to the petitioner in the F.1.R. And admittedly no weapon had been recovered from his custody during the investigation. The investigating officer had found that the petitioner was merely present at the scene of the crime at the relevant time and that he was neither armed on that occasion nor he had caused any injury to any person. There existed pitched enmity between the parties based upon a previous murder and, thus, a possibility could not safely be ruled out of consideration regarding spreading the net wide by the complainant party so as to falsely entangle the petitioner in the present criminal case. The investigation of this case qua the petitioner has already been finalized and, thus, his physical custody is not required. At this stage for the purposes of investigation. In the circumstances of this case mentioned above we have found the case against the petitioner one of further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr:P.C.
4. For what has been discussed above this petition is converted into an appeal and the same is allowed and, resultantly, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.