MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs The STATE and otherss
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Muhammad Iqbal, who is accused in an F.I.R. registered under Sections 302 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was alleged to have raised a 'Lalkara' (incitement) but was not armed and did not fire the fatal shot, was entitled to bail pending trial. The court held that the determination of whether the 'Lalkara' was commanding in nature and whether the co-accused acted upon it required detailed evidence to be scrutinized during trial, rather than at the bail stage. Furthermore, the court noted that the prosecution failed to ascribe any specific role of firing or possession of a weapon to the petitioner. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, admitting the petitioner to bail. The key principle laid down is that where the role attributed to an accused is limited to raising a 'Lalkara' without evidence of weapon possession or direct physical assault, the case falls within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, entitling the accused to bail.
- Is an accused who allegedly raised a 'Lalkara' without being armed or firing a shot entitled to bail under the principle of further inquiry?
- Can the nature and effect of a 'Lalkara' be definitively determined at the bail stage of criminal proceedings?
- Does the absence of a specific role of firing or weapon possession in the F.I.R. justify the grant of bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' SYED MUHAMMAD KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J.---Muhammad Iqbal, petitioner seeks his release on post- arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.1309 dated 5-11-2012 registered under sections 302, 34, P.P.C. With Police Station Sargodha Road District' Faisalabad.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the complainant and his brother Waheed Ahmad alias Kukoo were standing in the Main Bazar Noorpur when the petitioner along with unknown accomplices attracted there and on the "Lalkara" raised by Muhammad Iqbal, petitioner, . Shoaib alias Sabir, co-accused fired at Waheed Ahmad hitting on his left eye who succumbed to the injuries at the spot.
3. Parties heard. Record perused.
4. The submission of learned counsel for the complainant that the "Lalkara" was commanding in nature and co-accused of the petitioner while acting upon the same had killed Waheed Ahmad alias Kukoo, is the question which cannot be determined at this stage as it needs detailed evidence whether the "Lalkara" of the petitioner was commanding in nature and the co-accused had acted upon the same for killing an innocent person. The learned counsel has also relied upon the call- data which calls were allegedly made by the petitioner prior to the occurrence and also thereafter but again this evidence can be thrashed and scrutinized by the court of competent jurisdiction in appropriate proceedings. On the face of the record, the petitioner is simply accused of raising "Lalkara" for killing Waheed Ahmad and in this connection, he had not been ascribed with any role of fire upon the deceased-. Even, it has also not been mentioned in the F.I.R. That he was armed with any weapon at that time. The case of the petitioner in this manner squarely falls within the purview of section 497(2), Cr.P.C., therefore, he is entitled for the concession of bail.
5. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and Muhammad Iqbal, petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000 (Rupees One hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD ALI alias ALI Versus State 2019 YLRN 19