MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs STATE and another
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 127/2014 registered under Sections 337-A(i), 337-A(iii), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Vahova, District Dera Ghazi Khan, wherein the specific allegation against him was causing a sota blow to the complainant's nose. The core legal question was whether the petitioner made out a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 given the medical board's findings and conflict between ocular and medical accounts. The Lahore High Court held that the petition should be allowed as a medical board opined that the possibility of fabrication of the injury attributed to the petitioner could not be ruled out, creating a conflict with the ocular account and entitling the accused to the benefit of the doubt. The court laid down the principle that where medical evidence casts doubt on the veracity of an injury attributed to an accused, creating a conflict with the ocular account, the case falls within the purview of further inquiry warranting the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Does a conflict between the ocular account and medical evidence justify the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Whether the opinion of a medical board regarding the possible fabrication of an injury creates a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to the benefit of the doubt at the bail stage when the medical evidence contradicts the specific injury attributed to him?
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(iii), 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
The petitioner seeks the grant of post-arrest bail in case FIR No, 127/2014 dated 12.06.2014 registered under Sections 337-A(i), 337- A(iii), 148 & 149 of PPC at Police Station Vahova, District Dera Ghazi Khan.
2. Precise allegation against the petitioner is that he gave a sota blow to Azhar Mumtaz, the complainant that landed on his nose.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. It has been the stance of the petitioner throughout that he was falsely involved in the case. That is why he approached Area Magistrate, Tounsa Sharif, requesting him to constitute a medical board so as to re-examine the injured PW/complainant. His application was allowed vide order dated 02.07.2014 regarding Injury No, 2, it was opined by the medical board that: Keeping in view the shape of fracture, the possibility of fabrication cannot be ruled out.
It is pertinent to mention that Injury No, 2 is attributed to the petitioner. Since a doubt has been cast by the medical board regarding this injury, possibility cannot be ruled out that the petitioner was involved in case maliciously. Be that as it may, the ocular account is in conflict with the medical evidence. It goes without saying that the benefit of the doubt is to be resolved in favour of the accused. At any rate, the guilt of the petitioner calls for further inquiry within the purview of sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. Taking all the facts and circumstances into consideration, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing surety bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.