MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ETC. vs THE STATE-
This post-arrest bail application arose from a case registered against the petitioners and co-accused under Sections 302, 307, 148, 149, and 447 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following a land possession dispute resulting in the fatal shooting of a woman and injuries to eyewitnesses. The core legal question was whether accused persons who did not fire the fatal shot and only caused simple injuries to witnesses should be granted bail on the ground that vicarious liability requires further inquiry. The Lahore High Court allowed the bail application for petitioners Muhammad Yaqoob and Dost Muhammad, holding that the question of vicarious liability and common intention to commit murder should not be deeply evaluated at the bail stage. The court laid down the principle that where the specific role attributed to an accused involves causing simple injuries without firing at the deceased, the application of vicarious liability remains a matter of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Whether the question of vicarious liability should be deeply examined at the stage of deciding a bail application?
- Can an accused accused of causing simple injuries be admitted to bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 on the ground of further inquiry into common intention?
- Whether active participation resulting only in simple injuries to prosecution witnesses brings an accused's case within the scope of further inquiry during murder proceedings?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 447, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
A case was registered against the petitioner and 8 others under sec--tion 302/307/148/149/447, P.
P. C. A dispute subsisted between the parties regarding the possession on of land. The allegation is that the petitioner N. 2 and Ahmad Nawaz co-accused trespassed into the land, which was in possession of the deceased and cultivated by her husband, i.e. The com--plainant. The complainant came to the site. He was followed by Mst. Alam Khatoon deceased, the petitioner and the co-accused fired at her as well as P. Ws. With the result that she was hit fatally and whereas P.
Ws. Were also injured.
2. The bail having been refused to the petitioners by the learned Sessions Court they have now moved this Court to the matter. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that they did not fire at the deceased; the only role attributed to them is that they fired at the P. Ws. But the injuries suffered by them have been declared simple. It is submitted that the question of vicarious liability should not be determined at this stage end that the petitioners' case requires further inquiry.
3. Bail has been opposed on behalf of the State on the plea that the petitioners were armed and that they participated in the occurrence. It is further contended that the land was in possession of the deceased and her husband and that the petitioners trespassed and were thus the aggressors.
4. It transpires from the perusal of the record that the deceased was not hit by the petitioners: only the P. Ws. Namely Khan Zaman, Noor Khan and Muhammad Khan suffered injuries at their hands.
These were however declared simple. I am inclined to agree with the petitioners learned counsel that the question of vicarious liability should not be deeply examined at the bail stage. Whether or not the petitioners shared the common intention to commit murder of Mst. Alam Khatoon deceased and launched a murderous assault on P. Ws. Is a matter which needs further inquiry. The case apparently fails within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr. P. C.
5. For all these reasons the petitioners Nos. 2 and 3, namely Muhammad Yaqoob and Dost Muhammad are enlarged on bail provided each one of them furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.
20,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commis--sioner, Mianwali.
Cited by 8 cases
- KARAM DAD Versus MUHAMMAD YOUNAS 2005 PCrLJ 1535
- SHABBIR AHMAD vs THE STATE 2004 YLR 1554
- Khawaja NOOR vs MUMTALAH KHAN And Another 2003 YLR 151
- 1988 PLD 165 1988 PLD 165
- ZAFFAR ALI KHAN vs Tim STATE 1986 PLD Sh. C (A J & K) 74
- IQBAL MASIH and another vs THE STATE 1984 MLD 1393
- KHIZAR vs THE STATE 1985 MLD 875
- KARAM DAD and others vs MUHAMMAD YOUNAS and others 2005 P C R L J 1535