Kamran vs Kamran Malik and another
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by an accused charged with abetment in a triple murder case. The petitioner was alleged to have exhorted his father, the co-accused, to commit the fatal assault on three brothers. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was not attributed any physical harm to the deceased but was accused of instigation, was entitled to the concession of bail pending trial. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner's specific role—allegedly instigating his father rather than taking the deadly initiative himself—raised a question of further inquiry under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Holding that the petitioner could not be detained merely as a measure of punishment and noting that the investigation was complete, the Court allowed the appeal and granted bail. The key principle laid down is that where an accused's specific role in a crime is subject to further inquiry, particularly regarding the nature of their participation (instigation versus direct action), they are entitled to bail under the principle of further inquiry.
- Does the role of an accused who allegedly instigates a crime rather than committing the physical act fall within the ambit of further inquiry under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can an accused be kept in detention pending trial merely as a measure of punishment?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the investigation is complete and their specific role in the offense requires further evidentiary determination?
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.---W aseem Aslam, Waqas Aslam and Siddique Aslam, real brothers inter se, were shot dead at 8:30 p.m. on 14.1.2020 within the precincts of Police Station BhanaMarri Peshawar; Kamran Malik, complainant survived the assault unscathed. Muhammad Ishaq, co-accused, is assigned fatal shots in the deadly assault while the petitioner , no other than his son, is blamed to have exhorted him to take on the deceased.
A previous brawl is cited as motive for the crime.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Awful magnitude of violence and resultant loss of life notwithstanding, nonetheless, the petitioner though statedly present with other family members outside his home where the deceased had gone to lodge complaint for the previous incident, is not attributed any harm to them, as on prosecution's own showing, he allegedly instigated his father , otherwise authoritatively placed on the parental rung. Question as to whether , instead of taking deadly initiative himself, he preferred to persuad e his father for the misadventure, a role, contrary to the traditions, brings the accusation within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and thus, would be best settled after recording of evidence, therefore, he cannot be kept behind the bars merely as a measure of punishment. Investigation being complete, petitioner's continuous detention is not likely to serve any useful purpose,. beneficial to the prosecution. Criminal petition is converted into appeal and allowed; petitioner shall be released on bail subject to furnis hing bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/duty Judge.
These are the reasons of our short order of even date, reproduced below: "For reasons to follow , this petition is conv erted into appeal and allowed; petitioner shall be released on bail subject to furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/duty Judge."
Cited by 1 case
- Ali Hassan Jeho vs The State 2021 SHC 848