Ahmad Ali vs The State and another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Lahore High Court refusing post-arrest bail to the petitioner, Ahmad Ali, in a case involving charges under sections 302, 324, 201, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was not named in the initial FIR and was implicated only through a supplementary statement with a limited role, was entitled to the concession of bail. Upon review, the Supreme Court observed that the petitioner was not alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased, and his implication relied on a supplementary statement regarding the act of holding a victim. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner's case fell within the ambit of further enquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petition was converted into an appeal, allowed, and the petitioner was granted bail subject to furnishing a bail bond, establishing the principle that where an accused's role is limited and requires further evidentiary enquiry, bail should be granted.
- Does the implication of an accused in a supplementary statement, without an allegation of causing injury, constitute a case for further enquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when they are not named in the initial FIR and their alleged role is limited to catching hold of a victim?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 201, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---Petitioner seeks leave to appeal again st the order dated 12.10.2020, whereby bail was refused to him by the learned Lahore High Court, Lahore in case FIR No. 107 dated 15.01.2020, offence under sections 302, 324, 201, 148, 149, P .P.C., registered at P .S. Madina Town, Faisalabad.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length and perusal of available record, it has been observed by us that admittedly petitioner is not named in the FIR and he was implicated in this case through supplementary statement of complainant with the role of catching hold of Javed Bashir , one of the deceased, who was fired at by co-accused Haider Ali. There is no allegation against him of causing any injury on the person of either of the deceased. In the circumstances, case against him calls for further enquiry within the ambit of section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure.
3. For the foregoing, the instant criminal petition is converted into an appeal and the same is hereby allowed.
Appellant Ahmad Ali is allowed bail (in the instant FIR) subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Cited by 3 cases
- AHSIN ALI Versus State 2025 SCMR 1367
- Ahsin Ali, Muhammad Ramzan alias Jani vs The State 2025 SCP 190
- Muhammad Javed etc vs State etc PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 1490