FIDA HUSSAIN and 2 others vs THE STATE and anothers
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused in a case involving charges under sections 320, 322, and 337-G of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which were later upgraded to include section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 following a private complaint. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail despite being named in the FIR with a specific role, given that the initial police investigation had declared them innocent and placed them in Column No. 2 of the challan. The Court dismissed the bail petition, holding that the police's opinion declaring the accused innocent is not binding on the court. The Court emphasized that the petitioners were named in the FIR with a specific role, the incident occurred in broad daylight, and the Supreme Court had previously observed that prima facie involvement could not be ruled out. The key principle laid down is that the police's finding of innocence (ipsi dixit) does not constrain the trial court's discretion to summon accused persons or deny bail when a prima facie case exists.
- Is the police opinion declaring an accused innocent in the challan binding on the court during bail proceedings?
- Can bail be denied if the accused was placed in Column No. 2 of the police challan?
- Does a prior dismissal of a petition by the Supreme Court regarding the summoning of accused affect subsequent bail applications?
- Section 320, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 322, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-G, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' CH. MUHAMMAD.TARIQ, J.--- The petitioners seek their bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.255 of 2010 dated 28-6-2010 registered under sections 320, 322, 337-G, P.P.C. At Police Station Kot Chhutta District Dera Ghazi Khan.
2. The allegations against the petitioners are that Tayyab and Muhammad Yousaf were proceeding back to their house on a motorcycle after getting diesel from the agency. The complainant and Saeed were following them on another motorcycle. They saw that the petitioners were present on their motorcycle at Noor Wala and chased them. As soon as they reached opposite to Shahzad Cotton Factory nearby to PSO Petrol Pump, Bashir Ahmad showed pistol to Tayyab. The petitioner tried to intercept them and the motorcycle became out of control by Tayyab. Resultantly Tayyab and Muhammad Yousaf were crushed over by back wheels of a troller. Muhammad Yousaf died at the spot whereas left leg of Tayyab upto knee joint was crushed over completely and left arm was also fractured.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant due to previous enmity. Before filing of complaint, a criminal case F.I.R. No.255 of 2010 dated 28-6-2010 was registered against the petitioners. The Investigating Officer after investigation declared all the petitioners innocent and had submitted challan before the learned trial court in Column No.2. There is no allegation that any of the petitioners fired upon the complainant, injured or deceased person nor there is allegation that the petitioners pushed them under the troller. It is a case of mere accident and the petitioners have been roped due to previous enmity, therefore, petitioners be granted bail after arrest.
4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, Punjab instructed by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed this bail petition and has contended that the matter went up to Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan but the petitioners were not granted bail. The petitioners have committed a heinous offence. It was a broad-day occurrence. The petitioners were nominated with specific role, therefore, petitioners are not entitled for the grant of bail, this petition be dismissed.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. Perusal of record highlights that being dissatisfied with the investigation of Investigating Officer the complainant filed a private complaint in which the learned trial court after recording summary evidence vide order dated 3-9-2010 summoned the petitioners and held that prima facie case under sections 302/34, P.P.C. Is made out against the petitioners. The petitioners further challenged the summoning order before the High Court in Revision Petition No.368 of 2010 which was dismissed by this Court on 16-9-2010. The matter went up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan who vide order dated 1-12-2010 dismissed the Criminal Petition No.1159-L of 2010 and held that prima facie involvement of the petitioners in the offence cannot be ruled out at this stage. Thereafter the argument of learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are entitled for the grant of bail because they were declared innocent by the police and were put in Column No.2 of the challan is misconceived as ipsi dixit of police is not binding on the Court. Perusal of record highlights that it was a broad-day occurrence. The petitioners are named in the F.I.R. With a specific role. Previous enmity between the parties is admitted by the petitioners. All the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners shall be considered at the time of trial. No case for grant of bail is made out. This bail petition is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- Mohsin Raza vs The State 2021 MLD 1800