Syed SHAH FAHAD vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 655 registered under section 17(4) Haraba at Police Station Tehkal, Peshawar. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail when the only incriminating material against him was a statement of a co-accused recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Peshawar High Court held that the statement of the co-accused under section 161 does not constitute legal evidence, and in the absence of other incriminating evidence, the petitioner's case falls within the purview of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Accordingly, the petition was allowed, and the petitioner was granted post-arrest bail subject to furnishing surety bonds.
- Whether a statement of a co-accused recorded under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 constitutes legal evidence against an accused for the purpose of bail?
- Does the absence of incriminating evidence other than a co-accused statement bring a case within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- When is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail in a case involving an offence under Section 17(4) Haraba?
- Section 17(4), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J.---Petitioner is seeking bail in case F.I.R. No,655 dated 7-10-2010 registered for crime under section 17(4) Haraba by Police Station Tehkal, Peshawar.
' Arguments heard and record perused.
2. In this case besides, the petitioner, Sohail Ahmad co-accused was made principal accused to whom bail was refused even by this court/Bench on 20-5-2011 because there was strong corroborated circumstantial evidence against him and because the crime, was committed in a ruthless manner, however, on the entire available record there is no incriminating evidence available against the present petitioner except the statement of co-accused recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. Which is not falling within the purview of legal evidence hence, his case is one of further enquiry.
' Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the accused-petitioner is granted bail in the sum of Rs,200,000 (Two lac) with two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Illaqa Judicial/Duty Magistrate.