Gul Hassan vs The State
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, Gul Hassan, who is accused in FIR No. 61 of 2019 for offenses under Sections 302, 109, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860. The applicant sought bail after his initial application was rejected by the trial court. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to bail under the principle of 'further inquiry' as per Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, given the allegations of murder and the evidence presented. The Court held that the applicant was not entitled to bail, noting that the FIR was lodged with promptitude, the applicant was specifically nominated, a weapon was recovered at his pointation, and eyewitnesses and medical evidence supported the prosecution's case. The Court affirmed the principle that the mere possibility of further inquiry, which exists in almost every criminal case, does not automatically entitle an accused to bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, particularly when prima facie evidence links the accused to the crime.
- Does the mere possibility of further inquiry in a criminal case automatically entitle an accused to the grant of bail under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail where there is prompt FIR registration, specific nomination, and supporting medical and eyewitness evidence?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, J.---Through this application the applicant Gul Hassan son of Muhammad Bakhsh seeks bail in FIR No.61 of 2019 lodged with Police Station City Dera Murad Jamali, District Naseerabad under Sections 302, 109, 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 ("P.P.C.").
Earlier the bail application filed by the applicant before the Additional Sessions Judge, Naseerabad at Dera Murad Jamali ("trial court"), was rejected vide order dated 16th October, 2019.
2. Brief facts of the case are that ON 28.05.2019 at about 10:50 a.m. the complainant namely Inayatullah lodged the referred FIR, alleging therein that on the stated date at about 10:20 a.m. he, his brother and relatives on account of personal work were present at Shah Pump situated at Dera Murad Jamali. In the meanwhile, the applicant along with absconding accused persons armed with TT pistols came there, and aimed pistol at his brother with slogan that they will not leave him alive today and started indiscriminate firing. Resultantly his brother received bullet injuries and succumbed at the spot.
The compliant further stated that the motive behind the incident is previous enmity and the accused committed murder of his brother on the instigation of Amir Bakhsh and Irfan.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned DPG and have gone through the record with their able assistance. The perusal whereof reveals that the FIR has been lodged with promptitude. The applicant has been nominated in the FIR. Recovery of weapon has been effected on the pointation of the applicant. The eye- witnesses fully implicated the accused in the commission of offence. Medical evidence prima-facie supported the allegation levelled against the accused in the FIR. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant that "no specific role has been ascribed to the applicant and case of the applicant falls within the purview of further inquiry as enumerated under Section 497(2), Cr.P.C." has no force. In this regard the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan on the case of Perveen Akhtar v. State 2002 SCMR 1886 held as under: "Undoubtedly, in such-like cases, it is said that accused has made out a case of further inquiry. In view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Asmatullah Khan v. Bazi Khan and another (PLD 1988 SC 621) merely for such reason accused would not be entitled for grant of bail because mere possibility of further inquiry which exists almost in every criminal case, is no ground for treating the matter as one under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
Thus, in view of above, the Criminal Bail Application No(s). 170 of 2019 is dismissed.
Needless to mention here that the observation made hereinabove are meant for disposal of the instant application alone, which shall have no bearing on merits of the case.
Cited by 1 case
- Naseem Bibi vs Gull Faraz and another PLJ 2021 Cr.C. 1217, 2021 PLD Islamabad 120