MUHAMMAD AZHAR IQBAL vs The STATE and anothers
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by Muhammad Azhar Iqbal, who was accused of theft of 20,000 liters of fuel from a filling station where he worked as a filler. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail given the nature of the allegations and the evidence presented. The Lahore High Court held that the allegations against the petitioner were hazy and ambiguous, noting that a filler's duties did not involve storage or drainage of fuel from the main tank. Furthermore, the court observed that the prosecution failed to provide documentary evidence or account books to substantiate the theft, and the statements of witnesses were contradictory. Crucially, the court held that the alleged extra-judicial confession was joint in nature, rendering it the weakest form of evidence. Finding substance in the argument that the petitioner was falsely implicated due to malice, the court confirmed the ad-interim pre-arrest bail, establishing that joint extra-judicial confessions carry minimal evidentiary value in criminal proceedings.
- What is the evidentiary value of a joint extra-judicial confession in criminal proceedings?
- Can pre-arrest bail be granted when the allegations against the accused are found to be ambiguous and lacking documentary support?
- Does the role of a filling station employee as a 'filler' inherently involve access to the main fuel storage tanks?
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.---The allegation against the petitioner, Muhammad Azhar Iqbal is that he was a filler at Sunny Filling Station (Total), owned by Nadeem Haider (complainant); the petitioner joined by five fillers and manager of the said Filling Station committed theft of 20,000 liters of fuel, valuing at Rs,22,60,000 within the view of Muhammad Hussain and Abid Shakoor on 4-3-2014; the accused/petitioner and his co-accused jointly admitted their guilt qua theft of 20,000 liters of oil when they were interrogated by the complainant.
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and. Perusing the record, it is observed that allegation against the petitioner is somewhat hazy and ambiguous. Learned Deputy Pfosecutor General Punjab submits that a filler, at any filling-station, only works at the dispensing-unit where fuel is supplied to the commuters and he has nothing to do with the storage and drainage thereof from the main tank, which is the exclusive job of the manager and the other staff, working there for the said purpose. The statements of the witnesses Muhammad Hussain and Abid Shakoor add to obfuscation of allegation against the petitioner, rather than making it vivid. Unlike the story of F.I.R., an impression arises from the statements of the witnesses under section 161, Cr.P.C., that the accused sold the said quantity of fuel to an oil-tanker-rider in the presence of the complainant which rendered the matter, as regards involvement of the petitioner in this case, still hazier. The complainant did not produce any documentary evidence or account-books during the course of investigation as to storage and drainage of the fuel on the said day, before the investigating officer, which he could have easily done to support the story alleged. The evidence of extra judicial confession of all the accused, being joint in nature, would be considered weaker of the weakest type, as acknowledged by the law. The argument of the learned counsel that the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case due to malice or ulterior motives of the complainant may not be without substance, as record available also hints at it. Therefore, this application is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest to the petitioner vide order dated 26-5-2014 is confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.