GHULAM QADIR vs The STATE and others
This petition for leave to appeal challenged an order of the Lahore High Court refusing post-arrest bail to the petitioner, Ghulam Qadir, in a murder case registered under Section 302 and Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances of his implication. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner was initially listed as an eye-witness in the FIR and was only implicated as an accused a day later based on a statement from the deceased's mother, who was not present at the scene. Furthermore, the investigation concluded that the co-accused was responsible for the injuries, and the petitioner's involvement remained ambiguous. Holding that the case against the petitioner fell within the scope of 'further inquiry' under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and noting that the investigation was complete, the Court granted bail. The key principle laid down is that where the prosecution's case against an accused is based on questionable subsequent implication and the investigation is finalized, the accused is entitled to bail for further inquiry.
- Does the subsequent implication of an eye-witness as an accused in a murder case constitute grounds for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when the investigation is finalized and the prosecution's case rests on ambiguous evidence?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---Through this petition Ghulam Qadir petitioner has sought leave to appeal against the order dated 17.12.2015 passed by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No, 14183-B of 2015 whereby post-arrest bail was refused to him in case FIR No, 222 registered at Police Station Noorpur, District Khushab, on 11.07.2015 in respect of an offence under section 302, P.P.C. Read with section 34, P. P.0 .
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record we have straightaway observed that the petitioner had been mentioned in the FIR as an eye-witness of the occurrence and not as one of the culprits and it was after one day of registration of the FIR that the status of the petitioner had been transformed in this case into one of the accused persons on the basis of a statement made by the mother of Mst. Sana Bibi deceased. A perusal of the FIR shows that the mother of the deceased was not residing with the deceased at the time of the alleged occurrence and we have been informed that the mother of the deceased ordinarily resides at Rawalpindi and she had made her statement in respect of the present criminal case on the basis of some information supplied to her by some other persons. As a result of its investigation the investigating agency has concluded that it was only Saqib co-accused who had caused all the injuries to the deceased and that involvement of the petitioner in the murder in issue could not be ruled out of consideration in one capacity or the other. For all these reasons we have found the case against the petitioner to be a case calling for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. The investigation of this case has already been finalized and a Challan has been submitted and, thus, physical custody of the petitioner is not required at this stage for the purposes of investigation.
3. For what has been discussed above this petition is converted into an appeal and the same is allowed and, consequently, Ghulam Qadir petitioner is admitted to bail in the above mentioned criminal case subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.