RASHEED vs STATE, etc
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a criminal case involving charges under Sections 324, 337-F(iii), and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, arising from an F.I.R. registered at Police Station Okanwala Bangla, Sahiwal. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances of the alleged offense and the status of the investigation. The Court observed an unexplained seven-day delay in lodging the F.I.R., noted that the injury sustained was to a non-vital part of the body, and questioned the intent to kill. Furthermore, the Court highlighted the lack of progress in the trial, emphasizing the accused's constitutional right to a speedy trial. Concluding that the case required further inquiry into the petitioner's guilt, the Court held that the matter fell within the scope of Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court exercised its discretion to grant post-arrest bail, establishing the principle that significant delays in F.I.R. registration and the absence of trial progress are valid grounds for bail under further inquiry provisions.
- Does an unexplained delay in lodging an F.I.R. constitute grounds for post-arrest bail?
- Is the lack of progress in a trial a relevant consideration for granting bail?
- Does a non-vital injury raise a question of intent sufficient to warrant further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Rasheed, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No 181/2017 dated 3.7.2017, under Sections 324, 337-F(iii), 34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Okanwala Bangla, Sahiwal.
2. Allegedly, the petitioner attempted at the life of Muhammad Nawaz, the injured.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it was noticed that there was unexplained delay of about seven days in lodging the F.I.R. Despite the fact that, allegedly, the petitioner was armed with a handgun and that the injured was at his mercy even then he did not repeat fire. The injury sustained by Muhammad Nawaz was also on his left leg, non- vital part of the body., The injury was declared as ghayr-jaifah mutalahimah falling under Section 337-F(iii), P.P.C. and it would a moot question for the learned trial Court to be determine if the petitioner intended to eliminate the injured.
4. At this juncture, it may be mentioned that one Abdul Ghaffor present in the Court confirmed that the injured has left his abode and he shown his inability to engage any private counsel. During the investigation, the recovery stands effected from the petitioner. He is in jail since his arrest. The trial not witnessed any progress. Speedy trial is the right of the accused and is now guaranteed under the Constitution. All these considerations render the case of the petitioner one of thorough probe within the meaning of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Thus, I am inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner.
5. For the reasons mentioned above, the application accepted and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/duty judge.