ASGHAR vs The STATE
The petitioner, charged under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and Section 13 of the Arms Ordinance for the murder of his wife, sought post-arrest bail after the trial court rejected his application. The trial court had initially refused bail on the grounds that the incident constituted an honor killing and that the compromise reached between the accused and the deceased's brother was not voluntary or legally competent. Upon review, the Gilgit Baltistan Chief Court held that the police report did not classify the offense as an honor killing, but rather as a simple murder. Furthermore, the Court found the compromise valid, noting that the deceased's parents were deceased and her brother, the complainant, had consented to the compromise. Emphasizing the welfare of the minor children who required their father's care, the Court determined that the case warranted further inquiry and that continued incarceration served no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court granted post-arrest bail to the petitioner, setting aside the trial court's refusal.
- Whether a trial court can refuse bail based on an allegation of honor killing when the police report does not classify the offense as such?
- Is a compromise between an accused and the brother of a deceased wife legally valid when the parents of the deceased are no longer alive?
- Does the welfare of minor children constitute a relevant factor in determining whether to grant post-arrest bail in a murder case?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 13, Arms Ordinance 1965
- Section 322, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.---The petitioner has been booked for the offence under section 302, P.P.C. read with section 13, A.O. vide FIR No, 13/2018 of police station Nomal Gilgit.
2. Initially the case was registered under section 322, P.P.C. as it was alleged that the deceased lady Mst. Haseena committed suicide. Later on during investigation and on receipt of postmortem report' of the deceased it revealed that the fire shot on the deceased was opened from a distance of more than 5 feet. The petitioner was booked under section 302, P.P.C. for murder of his wife and a 9 mm pistol and one crime empty were also taken into possession by the I.O. of the case as a case property .
3. The petitioner was committed to judicial lockup who applied for post arrest bail which was declined by the learned trial Court vide judgment/order dated 13.3.2019, hence this petition for the concession of bail.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the deceased lady left some minor children and they are in the custody of their grandfather . The parties have effected a compromise and the father and mother of the deceased lady are no more in this world and the complainant, who is real brother of deceased lady is also ready for recording of his statement in support of compromise. The learned counsel for complainant Raja Shakeel Ahmad, advocate also toe his line with the learne d counsel for the petitioner and submitted that a valid compromise has been affected between the parties and there was no legal justification with the learned trial Court to refuse the acceptance of compromise and enlarge the petitioner on bail.
5. The learned Dy. Advocate General submitted that the offence is one of the honor killing and not compoundable as necessary amendment in this regard has been introduced in Cr .P.C., to discourage the of fence of honor killing.
6. The main reason which prevailed with the learned trial court to refuse bail was firstly that the murder was one of the honor killing and secondly that the grandfather being father of the accused was not competent to enter into a compromise with the accused as the compromise could not be said to have been volunteer and uninfluenced one.
7. I am of the view that the reasons advan ced by the learned trial court are not tenable in the eyes of law as it is not mentioned in the final police report that the murder was one of the honor killing, it was pure and simple murder of a wife by her husband as alleged. Secondly , the father and mother of deceased lady are not alive and the complainant, who is real brother of deceased has effected a compromise with the accused/petitioner . The grandfather of the children is taking care of the minors and they are suffering because firstly they have lost love and affection of their mother and secondly a grandfather cannot take the needed care of the children as compared to a real father . No useful purpose will be served by detaining the petitioner/accused in jail.
8. In view of above detailed discussions, the case of the petitioner is one of the further inquiry and he is admitted to bail subject to furnishing his bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 10, 00,000/- (Rupees ten lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
9. Bail granted.