BASHARAT ALI vs The STATE
This matter arose from a post-arrest bail application filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 by an accused booked under Section 322 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution alleged that the deceased committed suicide by shooting herself due to continuous maltreatment and atrocities committed by the petitioner after their love marriage. The petitioner argued that the FIR was delayed by five days, lacked eyewitnesses, and that the alleged offence did not fall under the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. The Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court examined the record and noted that the petitioner remained a silent spectator during the incident, failed to provide medical assistance to save the deceased's life, and contributed through his conduct to her death. The Court held that a prima facie case of contributory negligence towards death was made out against the petitioner. Consequently, considering the specific facts and circumstances of the case, the Court dismissed the post-arrest bail petition.
- Whether inaction and failure to provide medical aid to a suicide victim can constitute grounds to refuse post-arrest bail in a case registered under Section 322 PPC?
- Whether an accused who creates circumstances forcing a victim to commit suicide can be refused post-arrest bail on the grounds of prima facie involvement?
- Section 322, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.---The petitioner has been booked for the offences under section 322, P.P.C. vide FIR No,29/2016 registered at Police Station Gupis, District Ghizer.
2. The precise facts of the occurrence as narrated in the above referred FIR are that on 25.08.2016, one Mst. Maria committed suicide by opening triggering a shot opened with a five shot rifle in the house of the petitioner. The father of petitioner submitted an application for registration of FIR, stating that because of the highhandedness and atrocities committed by the petitioner, the lady has committed suicide as all the options of survival were closed by the petitioner.
3. The local police after collecting incriminating evidence found the petitioner guilty and booked him for the offence under section 322, P.P.C.
4. The petitioner applied for bail in the trial Court which was refused vide order dated 04-10-2016 and being dissatisfied from the said order the petitioner has knocked the door of this Court for grant of relief of bail under section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the FIR is false and there is no eye-witness of the occurrence. There is a delay of five days in lodging the FIR which makes whole of the story doubtful. Further submitted that the offence under section 322, P.P.C. does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C, as the only diyat is to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased, if the offence is ultimately proved.
6. On the other hand the learned Dy. A.-G. opposed the bail petition and submitted that the delay of five days in lodging the FIR has been well explained as the father of the deceased was running from pillar to post for registration of FIR. The learned State's counsel further contended that the petitioner is liable for the offence under section 322, P.P.C. as he created such an ugly situation for the deceased where she preferred death than to survive. The petitioner showed a casual attitude towards the deceased if story of suicide is accepted at its face value which speaks a volume about his involvement in the case. There is a prima facie case against the petitioner and he may not be allowed the concession of bail.
7. I heard the parties at length and perused the record of the case. The petitioner is nominated in the FIR, which has been lodged by father of the deceased lady after hectic efforts and that too on the intervention of Superintendent of Police Ghizer. The petitioner's specific role is that he created environment through his conduct, which led the deceased to close the chapter of her life as she contracted love marriage with the petitioner and after marriage the petitioner changed his attitude and started teasing and maltreating the victim lady. The story of suicide even if accepted as correct, the gunshot wound as available on record was on 10th/11th ribs and the deceased died due to haemorrhage and excessive bleeding. The petitioner was present in his house, who watched this tragic incident like a silent spectator. The petitioner did not remove the lady to any nearby hospital to save her life, which speaks a volume about the ill intention as of the petitioner. The negative role of the accused made him liable to responsible for contributory negligence towards death of deceased.
8. Every case has its own peculiar circumstances and bail is either granted or refused under those circumstances and some broad principles laid down by the superior Courts are followed. The facts of every criminal case always vary from case to case and the precedent of a criminal case cannot be followed blindly in another case.
9. There is a prima facie case against the accused and the bail petition is dismissed accordingly.