GHULAM MUSTAFA vs The STATE and anothers
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from an F.I.R. registered under sections 324, 337-F(iii), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving allegations of attempted murder. The petitioner sought bail on the grounds that the injury attributed to him was on a non-vital part of the body, was not declared dangerous to life, and that the case involved a two-day delay in registration. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the nature of the injury and the statutory provisions involved. The Court held that because the injury fell under section 337-F(iii), which carries a maximum punishment of three years, it did not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Furthermore, the Court determined that the petitioner's liability for the offence under section 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 required further inquiry, bringing the case within the ambit of section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the bail petition was accepted.
- Does an offence punishable by three years imprisonment fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be granted when the alleged injury is on a non-vital part of the body and not declared dangerous to life?
- Does the lack of progress in a trial justify the grant of bail to an accused in custody?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' ALTAF IBRAHIM QURESHI, J.---Petitioner Ghulam Mustafa through the instant petition seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,505 registered under sections 324, 337-F(iii), 148, 149, P.P.C. With Police Station Harappa, District Sahiwal, on 21-10-2011.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioner, as per F.I.R., is that on 19-10-2011 at about 3-00 p.m., he along with his co-accused respective weapons, attempted to commit qatl-e-amd of the complainant and as a result of which he sustained injury.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that the instant case has been registered with the delay of two days. Allegedly the petitioner has caused injury to the complainant on his right thigh. The said alleged injury is on non-vital part of the body and has not been declared to be dangerous to life. The said injury attracts the provision of section 337-F(iii), which is punishable for three years, and does not fall within the prohibitory, clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Further there is no repetition of fire shot on his part. In such circumstances of the case, the question that if he ultimately can be held liable for the offence under section 324, P.P.C. Or that of his vicarious liability in the matter is to be gone into at trial. Hence, from such an angle, his case is open to further inquiry into his guilt and so, is cover under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. The petitioner is behind the bars since 26-3-2012 without any progress in the trial. So, the petitioner cannot be kept in jail for an indefinite period which, even otherwise, would not serve any useful purpose to the prosecution.
5. For what has been discussed above, I accept this petition and B allow bail to the petitioner subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- NAKAF alias NAQAB KHAN vs The STATE and another 2018 YLR 1765