GHAZI KHAN vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, Ghazi Khan, who was implicated in two separate FIRs registered at different police stations for the same incident involving allegations under Sections 324 and 353/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution alleged that the applicant and his accomplices, while traveling in a vehicle, fired upon police officials during a pursuit, resulting in injuries to the culprits themselves, though no police personnel were injured and no police property was damaged. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to the concession of bail given the circumstances of the alleged offense and the completion of the investigation. The Court held that the application of Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860 required further inquiry, as no injuries were sustained by the police, and noted that the offense under Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860 is bailable. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the applicant, emphasizing that the investigation was complete and the challan had been submitted.
- Does the absence of injuries to police officials during an alleged firing incident necessitate further inquiry into the application of Section 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Is the offense under Section 353 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 considered bailable?
- Does the completion of investigation and submission of a challan support the grant of bail to an accused?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' NISAR MUHAMMAD SHAIIH, J.---The applicant Ghazi Khan is involved in two Crimes No,127 of 2011 and 173 of 2011 registered at P.S. B-Section Latifabad and P.S. A-Section Latifabad respectively but both have been registered under same sections 324, 353/34, P.P.C.
2. ' As per both F.I.Rs,, the present applicant and three others were found in suspected condition when they were going on a Toyota Crolla Car without its number plate and when the police gave signal to stop them, the culprits ran away in their Car and on the contrary they also fired upon the police, therefore, the police of PS A-Section and then the police of P.S. B-Section also followed the culprits and due to the straightaway firing of the culprits the police also fired in their defence and ultimately three culprits were apprehended by the police including the present applicant Ghazi Khan and the Car was also secured from them while 4th culprit namely Khawand succeeded to run away. It is alleged that during such firing all the three culprits who were apprehended by the police had sustained fire arm injuries. Since the offence in question was committed in the area of both the Police Stations therefore, two police officials registered separate F.I.Rs, at their respective Police Stations for the same incident.
3. ' I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.G. For the State and also perused relevant record.
4. It is an admitted position that none from the police officials of two Police Stations sustained any sort of injury and even their vehicles were not damaged though the culprits including the applicant had allegedly fired upon them repeatedly therefore, the application of section 324, P.P.C. Needs further inquiry while the offence under section 353, P.P.C. Is bailable. Moreover the police has completed its investigation and the challan has also been submitted.
5. ' In the circumstances, the applicant seems to be entitled for the concession of bail and accordingly the applicant Ghazi Khan is granted bail in both the above crimes/F.I.Rs, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousands only) each and PR bond in the like amount, to the satisfaction of trial Court.
6. ' Both these Criminal Bail Applications stand disposed of along with listed applications.
Cited by 2 cases
- DUST MUHAMMAD alias DOSOO vs The STATE 2017 YLR 1320
- GHULAM FAREED vs THE STATE 2012 YLR 2061