MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others vs The STATE and others
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused in a criminal case registered under Sections 302, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following an incident involving the murder of the deceased, Nazir Hussain. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the petitioners were entitled to the concession of bail after arrest, given the specific allegations of firing assigned to them in the FIR and their subsequent status as fugitives from justice for approximately eight months. The Court held that the petitioners were specifically named in the FIR with distinct roles attributed to them regarding the firing. Furthermore, the Court observed that the petitioners had absconded for a significant period, undermining the police opinion regarding their absence at the scene. The Court emphasized that the trial court is the appropriate forum to determine the presence of the accused at the crime scene after recording evidence. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, establishing the principle that specific allegations of criminal acts combined with a significant period of absconsion generally disentitle an accused to post-arrest bail.
- Does the absconsion of an accused for a significant period disentitle them to the concession of post-arrest bail?
- Is it the role of the appellate court or the trial court to determine the presence of an accused at the crime scene based on conflicting evidence?
- Can bail be granted when specific roles of firing are attributed to the accused in the FIR?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---Petitioners seek bail after arrest in case FIR No, 51 dated 16.02.2015, offence under sections 302, 148, 149, P.P.C., registered at P.S. Saddar, District Bhakkar.
2. Precise allegation against the petitioners, as per the FIR, is that they along with their co-accused, while armed with pistols .30 bore attacked the complainant party. Co-accused Abid Hussain raised lalkara to avenge the murder of his brother and fired, multiple shots which hit the deceased Nazir Hussain @ Papu on various parts of his body. The . Fire shot by petitioner No, 1 Muhammad Aslam hit the deceased on hiS ribs on the right side whereas the fire shot by petitioner No,2 Khizar Abbas hit the deceased on his left cheek.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for respondent No,2, learned Law Officer and perusing the available record with their assistance, it has been noted by us that petitioners are specifically named in the FIR. Specific role of firing at the deceased has been assigned to them. The petitioners, as confirmed by the learned Law Officer, remained fugitive from law for about 08 months. In the circumstances, the police opinion regarding their absence at the time of occurrence has not found by us to be based on solid reasons. Even otherwise, it is for the learned trial Court to determine after recording evidence pro and contra as to whether the petitioners were present at the spot at the time of unfortunate incident or not. The trial of the case has already commenced and statements of some of the prosecution witnesses have since been recorded. In the circumstance, we are of the view that petitioners have not been able to make out a case for grant of bail.
4. For the foregoing reasons, this petition having no merit is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.