Muhammad Umer vs The State
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the applicant, Muhammad Umer, seeking post-arrest bail in a case involving the alleged murder of Sikandar Ali. The applicant was charged with Qatl-e-amd, with the prosecution alleging common intention. The core legal question was whether the applicant, who was alleged to have only instigated the crime while being empty-handed, was entitled to bail pending trial. The Court observed that the specific role of causing fatal firearm injuries was attributed to co-accused persons, while the applicant's role was limited to instigation. Furthermore, the Court noted a one-day delay in the lodgment of the FIR and existing enmity between the parties. Holding that the applicant's vicarious liability required further inquiry, the Court granted post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that where an accused is alleged to have only instigated an offense and was empty-handed at the time of the incident, and where the case involves disputed enmity and delayed FIR reporting, the question of vicarious liability warrants further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail.
- Does the allegation of instigation alone, without the use of a weapon, constitute sufficient grounds to deny post-arrest bail in a murder case?
- Is the vicarious liability of an accused who was empty-handed at the time of the incident a matter for further inquiry under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can a one-day delay in the lodgment of an FIR be considered a relevant factor when determining the entitlement to bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J: - It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits in furtherance of their common intention committed Qatl-e amd of Sikandar Ali by causing him fire shot injuries, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge / MCTC, Mirpurkhas has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application u/S 497 Cr .P.C.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party in order to satisfy their old enmity with him. There is 01 delay in lodgment of FIR and the role attributed to the applicant in commission of incident is only to the extent of instigation. By contending so, he sought for post arrest bail for the applicant on point of further inquiry. In support of his contention he has relied upon the case of Darhoon v . The State (2018 YLR note 228).
4. Learned A.P.G. for the State has opposed to the grant of post-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that he is vicariouslyiable for the commission of incident.
5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. There is 01 day delay in lodgment of FIR, same could not be overlooked. The specific role of committing death of deceased Sikandar Ali by causing him fire shot injuries is attributed to co-accused Gul Muhammad, Talib and Asad.
The applicant at the time of incident was found to be empty handed and the role attributed to him in commission of incident is only to the extent of instigation. The parties are already disputed, therefore, the vicarious liability on part of the applicant obviously is calling for further inquiry.
7. In view of above, the applicant is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
8. The instant bail application is disposed of in above terms.