RIAZ AKHTAR and anothers vs The STATE and another
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a post-arrest bail petition filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 in respect of FIR No. 384 registered under Sections 302, 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to bail after arrest where no specific firearm injuries are attributed to them and their common intention and vicarious liability require further inquiry. The court held that since no injuries were attributed to the petitioners and the question of vicarious liability falls within the realm of further inquiry during trial, the case falls squarely within the ambit of subsection (2) of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petition was accordingly allowed, and bail was granted to the petitioners subject to furnishing surety bonds. The key principle laid down is that the mere heinousness of an offense cannot serve as a ground to refuse bail to an accused person who otherwise establishes a case for further inquiry on merits.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when no specific injuries are attributed to the accused in a murder case?
- Does the mere heinousness of an offense constitute sufficient ground to refuse bail to an otherwise deserving accused?
- When does a criminal case qualify as one of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.---Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. Riaz Akhtar and Muhammad Hanif petitioners have sought bail after arrest in case FIR No,384/2015 dated 29.09.2015 under sections 302, 324, 148, 149, P.P.C., Police Station Saddar Wah, District Rawalpindi.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and only tentative assessment is required at this stage. The allegation against the petitioners as per FIR is that they along with their co-accused were following the deceased. Later on Riaz Akhtar petitioner along with Iftikhar alias Kharu and Qamar Zaman co- accused encircled the deceased, but there is no allegation of encircling the deceased against Muhammad Hanif petitioner. It has been noticed that no injury whatsoever is attributed to the petitioners on the persons of Tahir Mehmood deceased and Allama Zaheer alias Sadheer injured as the same has been attributed to George co-accused, therefore, the questions of sharing common intention. By the petitioners with their co-accused as well as their vicarious liability in the commission of alleged occurrence shall be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. In this regard, reliance can be placed on 1996 SCM R 1125. Admittedly, the petitioners are previous non-convict. They are behind the bars since 13.10.2015 without any fruitful progress in their trial. Investigation of the case is complete and the petitioners are no more required for further investigation. Mere heinousness of offence is no ground to refuse the concession of bail to the accused, who otherwise become entitled for that on the merits of case. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioners behind the bars.
3. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioners becomes one of further inquiry covered.By subsection (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioners are granted bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
4. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.
Cited by 1 case
- WALI UR REHMAN Versus State 2019 PCrLJN 113