AABID vs THE STATE and others
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail in a criminal case involving charges of abduction and related offenses under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner, along with several others, was accused of abducting three women. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the grant of bail pending trial, given the circumstances of the investigation. The Supreme Court observed that a significant portion of the prosecution's case had been found to be false during the investigation, with eight out of eleven accused declared innocent. Furthermore, the Court noted that one of the alleged abductees had previously exonerated the petitioner in a separate proceeding, and all co-accused had already been granted bail. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner's guilt required further inquiry, satisfying the criteria for the grant of bail. The principle laid down is that where the prosecution story is substantially weakened by investigation findings and exculpatory statements from victims, the case for further inquiry is established, warranting the release of the accused on bail.
- Does the fact that a significant portion of the prosecution's case is found to be false during investigation justify the grant of bail?
- Is the grant of bail appropriate when co-accused are already on bail and the victim has exonerated the petitioner?
- Does a case require 'further inquiry' when the police investigation fails to provide a positive opinion regarding the guilt of the accused?
- Section 365-B, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 364, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-H(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---Petitioner along with 10 . Others was proceeded against in terms of the case registered vide F.I.R. No,136 of 2011 dated 8-3-2011 under sections 365-B, 364, 337-H(ii), 148, 149, P.P.C. At Police Station Bhawana, District Chiniot on the statement of Muhammad Arif.
2. The prosecution story briefly stated is that on the night between 7/8 of March, 2011, petitioner along others abducted Mst. Nasreen Bibi, Mst. Anees Bibi and Mst. Bano Bibi while they were asleep at complainant's house.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks bail on the ground that the case is false; that petitioner and complainant are closely related; that 8 out of 11 accused named in the F.I.R. Have been found to be innocent during investigation and a final report under section 173, Cr.P.C. Was submitted only qua the 3 accused including the petitioner. Adds that even the petitioner was declared innocent during investigation.
4. Learned Additional Prosecutor-General opposed the petition. However, on court query, he did not deny that the police during investigation, did not give-any positive opinion with regard to the guilt or the innocence of the petitioner and it left the matter to be decided by the Court. Adds further that one of the abductees namely Mst. Bano Bibi had made a statement in the High Court in Writ Petition No,25630 of 2010 that petitioner had not abducted her.
5. Having heard petitioner's learned counsel at some length, we find that since the major part of the prosecution story has been found to be false, all the co-accused are on bail and one of the abductees has exonerated the petitioner, the question. Of petitioner's guilt would require further inquiry. Consequently, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed and subject to petitioner's furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, he shall be released on bail.
Cited by 2 cases
- SAJJAD and others vs STATE etc. PLJ 2018 Cr.C. (Lahore) 301
- MUHAMMAD IMRAN vs The STATE and others 2014 P Cr. L J 456