MUHAMMAD IJAZ vs STATE and another
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 302, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Alpa, District Multan. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and his co-accused beat the deceased with weapons, specifically attributing an iron rod blow to the petitioner's head, ultimately leading to the victim's death. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail in view of conflicting investigation reports regarding the manner of the incident. The court held that differing conclusions by investigating authorities, particularly the findings of the S.P. (Investigation) suggesting the injuries may have resulted from a motorcycle accident under the influence of alcohol rather than the alleged assault, brought the case within the ambit of further inquiry under the criminal procedure. Consequently, the court allowed the bail petition subject to furnishing surety bonds, while directing the petitioner to cooperate with the trial court for an expeditious conclusion.
- Whether conflicting findings by police investigating officers can bring a case within the ambit of further inquiry for the purpose of post-arrest bail?
- Is deeper appreciation of evidence permissible at the bail stage?
- Under what circumstances can bail once granted be subjected to cancellation for tampering with the trial?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No, 465, dated 3.12.2012 under Sections 302, 148, 149, PPC, registered at Police Station Alpa, District Multan.
2. As per prosecution story, the petitioner on 2.12.2012, came to the house of the complainant and took along Qaiser Abbas (deceased) on his motorcycle. Since the deceased did not come back, his father i.e, complainant alongwith PWs set out in search of his son and at 10.30 p.m., reached Ada Matitil where they heard sound of firing and found in the light of bulb that the petitioner and his cu- accused persons while equipped with lethal weapons were giving beating to the deceased. The specific role attributed to the present petitioner is that while equipped with an iron rod, gave blow of the said iron rod on the right side of head of deceased. It is also claim of the complainant that in their presence, the petitioner and his co-accused Muhammad Javed took along deceased while in injured condition on his motorcycle towards west Rajbah and that when the complainant and the PWs reached Khoh Tahliwala near control shed, the culprits having thrown the deceased there, fled away and that by that time, the deceased breathed his last.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is observed that the petitioner was arrested in this case on 8.4.2013. During the investigation, at one stage, S.P. (Investigation), Multan concluded that the occurrence did not take place in the manner as alleged by the complainant and the PWs had not even witnessed the occurrence rather the deceased and his companions had drunk liquor and were under the influence of the same and ultimately on their way on a motorcycle met with an accident resulting into injuries to deceased and Muhammad Ijaz accused.
4. I will refrain from commenting on the merits of the case lest it may prejudice the case of either party and also for the reason that deeper appreciation of evidence is neither permitted nor desirable at bail stage. However, the findings of S.P. (investigation). Multan bring case of the petitioner under the ambit of further inquiry though other I.Os have concluded regarding guilt of the petitioner. Accordingly, I am inclined to allow this bail petition. The petitioner shall be released from jail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of rupees one lac with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
5. Before parting with this order, it is observed that it has been apprised that the trial against the petitioner is in progress. The petitioner shall cooperate with the learned trial Court in expeditious conclusion of trial and if he deliberately hampers the trial, the complainant would be at liberty to seek his cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner through this order.