Zulfiqar vs The State and another
This criminal petition for leave to appeal arises from the rejection of post-arrest bail by the lower courts in a murder case. The petitioner, aged in his late sixties, was accused of involvement in a fatal shooting stemming from a property dispute. While the initial crime report attributed the first shot to the petitioner, the Investigating Officer subsequently concluded that the petitioner merely abetted the crime without being physically present at the scene. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the conflicting evidence regarding his presence and the discrepancy between the number of shots fired and the injuries sustained by the deceased. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner's culpability required further inquiry, particularly in light of the Investigating Officer's findings and the petitioner's advanced age. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal and granted bail. The key principle laid down is that where the prosecution's case against an accused is subject to significant evidentiary doubt, particularly regarding presence at the scene and the nature of the role played, the accused is entitled to the benefit of further probe and release on bail.
- Whether an accused is entitled to bail when the Investigating Officer's report contradicts the initial FIR regarding the accused's presence at the crime scene?
- Does a discrepancy between the number of shots fired and the injuries sustained by the deceased warrant further probe for the purpose of bail?
- Can the advanced age of an accused be considered a relevant factor in granting post-arrest bail in a murder case?
ORDER
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.---Behind bars since 14.06.2019, Zulfiqar , petitioner seeks admission to bail.
It is alleged that on the fateful day, he along with his two sons accompanied by three unknown assailants, each armed with a .30 caliber pistol, confronted Muhammad Shakeel Jahangir , deceased in the backdrop of a motive relating to a dispute over property; he is attributed first shot to the deceased on his right shin followed by fire shots by the co-accused. Autopsy revealed three entry wounds. Effective role qua the deceased assigned in the crime report notwithstanding, the petitioner has been found by the Investigating Officer to have merely abetted the crime without being at the spot.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Accompanied by two able bodied sons, each lethally armed, whether the petitioner had any occasion to venture the occurrence is an issue to be best settled after recording of evidence. Number of fire shots sustained by the deceased is not commensurate with the volley of fires collectively made by the assailants including the unknown dis a circumstance that additionally warrants further probe. Acceptance of plea raised by the petitioner , statedly in his late sixties, is yet another circumstance converging in his favour; his culpability certainly calls for further probe, thus, a case for his release on bail stands made out. The petitioner shall be released on his furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The petition is converted into appeal and allowed.
Cited by 6 cases
- Abdul Ghaffar vs The State and another 2025 YLR 789
- Hassan Iqbal vs The State and another 2022 LHC 2006
- Hassan Iqbal vs State & another 2023 PLJ Cr.C. 156
- HASSAN IQBAL Versus State 2023 PCrLJN 100
- Ayaz Ahmad vs State and another PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 1480
- Ayaz Ahmad vs The State and another 2022 LHC 2010