NASIR MURTAZA vs STATE and another
This petition for pre-arrest bail arises from FIR No. 199 dated 26.10.2016, registered at Police Station Thatha Sadiqabad, District Khanewal, for offences under Sections 337-A(iii) and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner was accused of assaulting the complainant's father, causing a nasal bone fracture. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the confirmation of pre-arrest bail given the circumstances of the case. Upon review, the Court noted a four-day delay in reporting the incident without a plausible explanation. Furthermore, the Court highlighted a report from the District Standing Medical Board, which questioned the initial medical opinion regarding the injury, suggesting the possibility of fabrication. The Court observed that no weapon was used or required for recovery, and the petitioner had already joined the investigation. Finding the petitioner's implication tainted by mala fide and determining that his physical custody was unnecessary for investigation, the Court confirmed the ad interim pre-arrest bail. The judgment reinforces the principle that pre-arrest bail may be confirmed where the prosecution's case appears doubtful, investigation is complete, and mala fides are evident.
- Does a significant, unexplained delay in lodging an FIR provide grounds for the grant of pre-arrest bail?
- Can a conflict between initial medical reports and a subsequent medical board opinion regarding the nature of an injury influence the grant of bail?
- Is pre-arrest bail appropriate when the accused has already joined the investigation and no further physical custody is required?
- Section 337-A(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' Through instant petition Nasir Murtaza, the petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No, 199 dated 26.10.2016, in respect of offences under Sections 337-A(iii), 34 PPC, registered at Police Station Thatha Sadiqabad, District Khanewal.
2. 2.Precise allegation against the petitioner, as contained in the crime report, is that on 22.10.2016 at 06:00 a.m. Khadim Hussain (complainant's father) was busy in conversation with Imam Masjid with regard to falling of wall belonging to Sakhawat Ali (complainant's uncle), meanwhile the petitioner along-with Ghulam Mujtaba and Istikhar flared up and in furtherance of their common intention, assaulted upon Khadim Hussain. The petitioner made fist blow at the nose of Khadim Hussain, resulting into fracture of nosal bone, hence this case.
3. 3.Arguments heard. Record perused. 4.This occurrence as alleged by the complainant was took place on 22.10.2016 whereas the matter was reported to the police on 26.10.2016 with the delay of four days and no plausible explanation has been brought on record for such delay. Allegedly, the petitioner had been attributed the role of causing fist blow at the nose of Khadim Hussain (complainant's father), which has been declared fracture in the nosel bone falling under the ambit of Section 337-A(iii) PPC. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought into the notice of the Court the report of re-examination of injured Khadim Hussain issued by the District Standing Medical Board where the Board did not agree with the opinion of first MLC unanimously regarding Injury No, 1, as possibility of fabrication could not be ruled out. Admittedly, neither any weapon was used in the alleged occurrence nor was required to be recovered from the petitioner. The implication of the petitioner along-with his real brothers seems to be tainted with mala fide and ulterior motive. The petitioner has already joined the investigation and his physical custody is not required any more to the, police for the purpose of investigation.
4. 5.In view of above, the petition in hand is allowed and the concession of ad interim pre arrest bail already granted to the petitioner stands confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 100,000/- (one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.