AZIM KHAN vs RASHID AHMAD ETC.
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the complainant seeking the cancellation of pre-arrest bail granted by the High Court to the respondents in a criminal case registered under sections 302, 307, 149, and 148 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question is whether the respondents were entitled to pre-arrest bail in the circumstances of the case, including subsequent involvement in other criminal acts and specific firearm allegations. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and allowed it, holding that the respondents' subsequent abscondence and involvement in another murder case, along with specific firearm attribution in the FIR, warranted the cancellation of their anticipatory bail. The key principle laid down is that subsequent criminal conduct such as abscondence in a murder case disentitles an accused from retaining pre-arrest bail, and minor evidentiary nuances do not justify pre-arrest bail in the face of specific fatal allegations.
- Does subsequent abscondence in another murder case justify the cancellation of pre-arrest bail?
- Is the presence of multiple firearm injuries at the same point on a deceased person's body a sufficient ground for granting pre-arrest bail?
- Whether pre-arrest bail granted by a High Court can be cancelled by the Supreme Court upon conversion of a petition into an appeal?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
M. S. H. QURESHI, J.-By this petition, the petitioner, who is complainant in the case, is seeking leave to appeal from the order dated 26-10-1981 of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, whereby he refused to cancel the bail before arrest granted by the Court of Session, Lahore, to respon--dents Rashid Ahmed and Liaqat Ali in a case under section 302/307/149 and 148, P. P. C.
2. At the initial hearing of the petition by this Court on 22-12-1981, a notice had been ordered to be issued to the aforesaid respondents directing them to appear personally before this Court today.
Rashid Ahmad respon--dent is not present and it is brought to the notice of this Court that he is absconding in a case relating to the murder of Akbar Shah P. W., which took place on the 4th of this month. As he is involved in another murder case and has not appeared on account of his reported abscondence in that case, he hardly deserves to remain on bail in this case.
3. Respondent Liaqat Ali has been produced in custody as he is stated to have been arrested in another case under section 307, P. P. C. There is specific allegation against him in the F. I. R. That he had come armed with carbine, had fired thereby causing injury at the left thigh of the deceased, and had along with his co-accused resorted to firing while fleeing from the scene. The reason which prevailed with the Court of Session and the High Court in letting him to be on pre-arrest bail is that the presence of three fire-arm injuries at the same point on the person of the deceased "demanded some caution". We are of the view that this was not a sufficient ground for grant of pre- arrest bail.
4. We accordingly convert this petition into appeal and allow the same, with the result that the anticipatory bail allowed to respondents Rashid Ahmad and Liaqat Ali is cancelled.
Cited by 1 case
- AZIZULLAH vs THE STATE 1997 MLD 1883