ABID HUSSAIN alias NOVAIZ and anothers vs STATE, etc.
This petition was filed under Section 498 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking pre-arrest bail in a criminal case involving charges under Sections 337-F(i), 337-F(ii), 337-A(i), 324, 148, 149, 381-A, and 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to the confirmation of their pre-arrest bail given the circumstances of the case. The Court held that the petitioners were entitled to bail, confirming the ad-interim pre-arrest bail. The ratio of the decision rests on the fact that no specific role was attributed to the petitioners, only a joint role of firing. Furthermore, the existence of a cross-version, the declaration of innocence of co-accused by the Investigating Officer, and the fact that other co-accused had already been granted bail, suggested potential exaggeration by the complainant. The Court emphasized that the determination of common intention and the veracity of the competing versions are matters for the trial court after evidence is recorded, and that the petitioners' previous non-convict status and cooperation with the investigation supported the confirmation of bail.
- Does the existence of a cross-version in a criminal case justify the grant of pre-arrest bail?
- Can pre-arrest bail be confirmed when the Investigating Officer has declared co-accused innocent?
- Is the determination of common intention a matter to be decided at the bail stage or by the trial court after evidence?
- Section 498, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 381-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Through this petition under Section 498, Cr.P.C. The petitioners have sought pre-arrest bail in case FIR No, 146/14 dated 31.07.2014 under Sections 337-F(i), 337-F(ii), 337-A(i), 324, 148, 149, 381-A and 411, PPC registered at Police Station Mela, District Sargodha.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have, also gone through the record of this case with their able assistance. This is bail before arrest and only tentative assessment is allowed at this stage. It has been noticed by this Court that no specific role is attributed to the petitioners.
Only a joint role of firing at the complainant is attributed to them alongwith their co-accused. It has also come on record that after the registration of FIR cross-version was also recorded by the petitioner side. It is a case of two versions one put forward by the complainant of the FIR and the other in the shape of cross-version recorded by the petitioner side and which version is correct is to be determined by the learned trial Court after recording evidence. During investigation co- accused of the petitioners namely Sarang, Bilal, Pervaiz, Ikram Ullah and Ramzan have been declared innocent by the Investigating Officer, which shows that the complainant has exaggerated the occurrence in order to prevail upon the petitioner side. Co-accused of the petitioners namely Sana Ullah has been allowed post-arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2014 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No, 15876 of 2014. The petitioners cannot be handed over to the police only for the purpose of effecting recovery so as to enable them to come out of the jail after few days.
The question of sharing common intention with their co-accused shall be determined by the learned trial Court after recording evidence False implication of the petitioners by the complainant after joining hands with the police by widening the net cannot be ruled out of consideration.
Admittedly the petitioners are previous non-convicts. They have already joined the investigation.
No useful purpose would be served by sending them behind the bars.
3. For what has been discussed above, the ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners vide this Court's order dated 30.03.2015 is confirmed subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.