EHSAN-UL-HAQ alias SHANI vs The STATE and others
This petition for leave to appeal challenged the Lahore High Court's refusal to grant post-arrest bail to the petitioner, Ehsan-ul-Haq alias Shani, in a case involving murder charges under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner was not named in the initial FIR but was implicated during the investigation through a replacement of another accused. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner was not alleged to have caused the fatal injury to the deceased, and significant confusion existed in the investigation record regarding the attribution of firearm injuries to the co-accused. Furthermore, the investigation was finalized, and the Challan had been submitted, rendering the petitioner's continued physical custody unnecessary for investigative purposes. The Court held that the petitioner's case fell within the scope of 'further inquiry' under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, and admitted the petitioner to bail subject to the furnishing of bail bonds.
- Does the introduction of an accused's name during investigation as a replacement for another accused, without direct attribution of the fatal injury, constitute a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the continued physical custody of an accused necessary for investigation purposes after the Challan has been submitted to the trial court?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---Through this petition Ehsan-ul-Haq alias Shani petitioner has sought leave to appeal against the order dated 19.01.2016 passed by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Miscellaneous No,15541-B of 2015 whereby post-arrest bail was refused to him in case FIR No, 65 registered at Police Station Ugoki, District Sialkot on 04.02.2015 in respect of an offence under section 302, P.P.C. read with sections 34 and 109, P.P.C.
During the investigation sections 148 and 149, P.P.C. had been added to the FIR.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record we have observed that admittedly the present petitioner had not been nominated in the-FIR and during the investigation his name had been introduced by way of replacement of another accused person mentioned in the FIR. A perusal of the FIR shows that it was Gulraiz Mumtaz co-accused who had allegedly fired at and killed Sarfraz Ali deceased and thereafter some co-accused had fired at the complainant party and one of the fires of the accused party had hit and injured Gulraiz Mumtaz co-accused who was thereafter whisked away from the place of occurrence by his co-accused. It is not denied that the petitioner had not caused any injury to Sarfraz Ali deceased and there is a lot of confusion in the record of investigation as to whose fire had actually hit Gulraiz Mumtaz co- accused. In his statement made before the police the said Gulraiz Mumtaz co-accused had not attributed any firearm injury to the present petitioner. The investigation of this case has already been finalized and a Challan has been submitted and, thus, physical custody of the petitioner is required at this juncture for the purposes of investigation.
3. For what has been discussed above 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. This petition is, therefore, converted into an appeal and the same is allowed and consequently Ehsan- ul-Haq alias Shani petitioner is admitted to bail in the above mentioned criminal case subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/ - (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Cited by 4 cases
- Muhammad Afzal Versus State 2025 YLR 2239
- MUHAMMAD ACHAR Versus State 2018 YLRN 234
- SAIF UR RAHMAN vs The STATE through Additional Advocate-General and another 2018 P Cr. L J 306
- MEHRAB SAMEJO Versus State 2017 PCrLJN 153