ZAHOOR AHMED alias ABDUL KARIM and another vs THE STATE
This criminal bail application was filed by the applicants, Zahoor Ahmed and Siraz Ahmed, challenging the order of the Sessions Judge, Khairpur, which dismissed their bail application in a case registered under sections 302, 324, 353, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution alleged that the applicants were part of an armed encounter with police, during which a police constable sustained fatal injuries from a co-accused, Muhammad Chuttal. The applicants contended that there was an unexplained 15-hour delay in lodging the F.I.R. and that no specific role of firing or causing injury was attributed to them, despite their presence at the scene. The court examined the record and observed that while the applicants were present and armed, the fatal injury was specifically attributed to the co-accused, Muhammad Chuttal, and no firing was alleged against the applicants. Finding the case against the applicants to be one of further inquiry, the court granted bail, holding that the absence of specific allegations of causing injury, coupled with the circumstances of the encounter, entitled the applicants to the relief sought.
- Does the mere presence of an accused at the scene of a police encounter, without specific allegations of firing or causing injury, constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail?
- When does a criminal case fall under the category of 'further inquiry' for the purpose of granting bail?
- Is an unexplained delay in lodging an F.I.R. a relevant factor for the court to consider when deciding a bail application?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD TASNIM, J.----Through this Criminal Bail Application the applicants have challenged the Order, dated 10-8-2010 passed by Sessions Judge, Khairpur in Criminal Bail Application No,891 of 2010, whereby Bail Application filed by present applicants was dismissed. Both the applicants Zahoor Ahmed alias Abdul Karim and Siraz Ahmed alias Sirajuddin alias Gajo are booked in Crime No,44 of 2010 of Police Station Babarloi registered under sections 302, 324, 353. and 34,, P.P.C. along with one Muhammad Chuttal.
2. Precisely, the case of prosecution is that on 15-6-2010 at 1100 hours, complainant along with his staff, during patrolling, received spy information with regard to presence of accused near Chattal Shaikh Marri. He gave such information to S.H.O. Hafeezullah, who also rushed towards the pointed place and also asked him move there. On reaching, the Police party saw accused Zahoor Ahmed, Siraj Ahmed alias Gajo and Muhammad Chattal, who all were armed with T.T. Pistols, and the accused persons started firing upon them. Police, in defence, also fired and such encounter lasted for five minutes. Resultantly, HC Munawar Ali sustained firearm injury caused by accused Chuttal who was taken to Hospital and, afterwards, succumbed to injuries. Ultimately, the instant F.I.R. was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that there is delay of about 15 hours in lodging of F.I.R., which has not been explained by the prosecution and benefit of such delay be extended to present applicants. He further says that no role, whatsoever has been assigned to present applicants except that their presence has been shown. He has argued that no doubt, Police has shown encounter with the present applicants but neither any injury was sustained by present applicants nor any firing was made from their weapons.
4. On the other hand, learned A.P. -G. has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the case falls under prohibitory clause as an innocent person has died. He further says that there is ample material which connects the present applicants with the commission of offence. He therefore, prayed that the Bail Application be rejected.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for parties and have gone through the record.
6. From the perusal of record it appears that there are three accused nominated in the F.I.R. Accused Muhammad Chuttal has been shown to be armed with Pistol and as per F.I.R. from his firing one Police Constable sustained injuries and subsequently, died but there is no allegation, whatsoever with regard to the present applicants. No doubt, present applicants were arrested and recovery was effected but no firing, whatsoever, was made from such weapons.
7. In my view, it is a case of further enquiry. Accordingly, I admit the applicants to bail on their furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees Two Lac) each and execution of Personal Bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.