RAB NAWAZ vs STATE and another
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, Rab Nawaz, in connection with FIR No. 172/2015, registered for offences under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving the alleged murder of the complainant's father. The core legal question is whether the petitioner is entitled to bail given the nature of the evidence and the circumstances of his implication. The Court observed that the incident was an unseen murder, and the petitioner was not initially nominated in the FIR, but was implicated only after a two-month delay through a supplementary statement. Furthermore, no recovery was effected from the petitioner, and the prosecution lacked direct evidence connecting him to the offence. Noting that co-accused had already been granted bail and that the petitioner's involvement required further inquiry, the Court held that the petitioner was entitled to relief. The principle laid down is that where an accused is implicated with significant delay, lacks direct evidence connecting them to the crime, and co-accused have already been granted bail, the case falls within the ambit of further inquiry, justifying the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Does the implication of an accused in a supplementary statement after a significant delay warrant the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the case is based on an unseen murder and lacks direct evidence connecting the accused to the crime?
- Does the grant of bail to co-accused provide a ground for the grant of bail to a petitioner similarly situated?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 201, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Rab Nawaz, petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No. 172/2015 dated 04.04.2015, registered under Sections 302/148/149/ 109/201, PPC at Police Station City Mailsi, District Vehari.
2. Precisely allegation against petitioner is that he alongwith co-accused has committed murder of Muhammad Saeed, father of complainant.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner, inter-alia, while reiterating his grounds mentioned in the bail application prayed for grant of post arrest bail.
4. Conversely, learned A.P.G vehemently opposed this bail petition.
5. Arguments heard and record perused.
6. Unfortunately, it is unseen murder occurrence.
' Complainant has nominated Saeed, Iftikhar, Sharifan, Muhammad Arif, Bashir Ahmad and other unknown persons as accused in the FIR on the basis of suspicion. Initially, petitioner was not nominated in FIR and he has been involved subsequently on the supplementary statement of complainant recorded on 10.06.2015, after delay of two months. No recovery has been effected from petitioner. As per police investigation, petitioner gave pistol to Muhammad Saeed accused, who fired upon deceased and thereafter he along with other co-accused made effort to dispose of dead-body of deceased and to destroy the evidence but no direct evidence is available against petitioner on the record which prima facie connect him with the commission of offence. Co- accused of petitioner namely Bashir Ahmad and Abid Hussain have been granted post arrest bail by learned trial Court vide order dated 03.06.2015. All these considerations render the case of petitioner within the ambit of further inquiry. Petitioner is behind the bars and no more required for further investigation. Resultant, this petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.