FATEH MUHAMMAD vs STATE & another
Through this petition, the petitioner Fateh Muhammad sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 70 dated 04.04.2016 registered under Sections 324, 337-F(iii), 337-F(vi) and 337-D of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Saddar Samundari, District Faisalabad. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given the allegations of causing firearm injuries to three persons and the attribution of delay in the trial. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner repeatedly fired at and injured three persons, the crime weapon was recovered at his instance, and the delay in the trial was partly attributable to the defence side. Consequently, the Court declined to grant post-arrest bail and dismissed the petition, while directing the trial court to conclude the trial expeditiously on a day-to-day basis within three months. The key principle laid down is that where an accused is charged with serious firearm injuries and contributes to trial delays, post-arrest bail is rightly refused.
- Whether an accused charged with causing firearm injuries to multiple persons is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does contribution of the defence to trial delays preclude the grant of post-arrest bail?
- What is the effect of the recovery of a crime weapon at the instance of the accused on a post-arrest bail petition?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F (iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(vi), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-D, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Through this petition, Fateh Muhammad petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No, 70 dated 04.04.2016 registered for offences under Sections 324, 337-F (iii), 337-F(vi) and 337-D of Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Saddar Samundari, District Faisalabad.
2. Precisely, the allegation against the petitioner as per narration available in the crime report is that on 04.04.2016 at 10:30 a.m. he while armed with .30-bore pistol caused fire-arm injuries to the injured witnesses.
3. Arguments herad. Record perused.
4. The petitioner admittedly a Pesh Namaz', caused fire-arm injuries in the abdomen, vital part of Nadeem Raoosl, on the right thigh of Nabeel Aslam and right shin of Abdullah which ranspires that he repeatedly shot fires and caused injuries to three persons. During investigation, crime weapon i.e pistol stands recovered at his instance. Though after submission of challan, learned trial Court could not procure the attendance of prosecution witnesses yet since 13.07.2017 the witnesses are appearing before the learned trial Court to depose against the petitioner but hearing of trial is being adjourned upon the requests of defence side which transpires that delay in conclusion of trial is also attributable to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the complainant ensures that the prosecution s itnesses shall remain incessantly present before the learned trial Court to get their statements recorded to ensure swift conclusion of the trial. In this view of the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant poet arrest bail to the petitioner. Hence, this petition stands dismissed.
However, learned trial Court is directed to proceed with the trial on day to day basis to ensure its expeditious conclusion preferably within a priod of three months after receipt of this order.