Asif Khan vs The State, etc.
The petitioner Asif Khan sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 220 dated 15.6.2013 registered under Sections 302 and 395 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Saddar, District Narowal. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to further inquiry into his guilt under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 given the contradictions between the ocular account and medical evidence. The Lahore High Court held that the injury attributed to the petitioner with a 'Danda' on the right arm was non-existent in the medical report, and the actual cause of death was a firearm injury attributed to a co-accused, while the police had also recommended the petitioner's discharge during investigation. The court ruled that the petitioner's involvement called for further inquiry, thereby granting him post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, coupled with police recommendations for discharge, constitute grounds for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, entitling an accused to bail.
- Does a contradiction between the ocular account and medical evidence regarding the injury attributed to an accused bring the case within the ambit of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when police investigation recommends his discharge from the case?
- Does the attribution of a non-fatal injury to an accused while the fatal injury is assigned to a co-accused warrant the grant of bail for further inquiry?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 395, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' SYED MUHAMMAD KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J. --- Asif Khan petitioner seeks his release on post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 220, dated 15.6.2013 registered at police station Saddar, District Narowal, under Sections 302 & 395, PPC.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioner is that he while armed with 'Danda' had inflicted an injury on the that right arm of Muhammad Amin who succumbed to the injuries caused by other co-accused with fire-arm.
3. Parties heard. Record perused.
4. As per crime report, an allegation of inflicting injury at the right .Arm of Muhammad Amin has been attributed to the petitioner which injury is non-existence on the right arm of the deceased rather injury No, 3 has been shown to have been inflicted on the left arm which was superficial injury. This contradiction in the medical evidence ' as well as ocular account brings the case of the petitioner within the ambit of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Furthermore, the fire-arm injury received by deceased Muhammad Amin is not the cause of death rather his death had occurred due to firearm injury attributed to some other accused. It is further noticed from the record that the police after investigating the matter had recommended the discharge of the petitioner from the case in hand and a set of three other persons has been introduced in the case in hand. Keeping in view these facts and circumstances of the case, the involvement and guilt of the petitioner calls for further inquiry entitling him for the concession of bail.
5. In view of above, this petition is allowed and petitioner Asif Khan is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 50,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the