Anwar Shaheen and another vs The State and another
The petitioners challenged the Peshawar High Court's order refusing them post-arrest bail in a case involving charges under sections 302, 324, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, and section 15 of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act, 2013. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail based on the material available on the record. Upon review, the Supreme Court noted that the deceased and the injured victim each sustained only one firearm injury. Crucially, while the case involved four accused, one co-accused was found innocent during the investigation. Furthermore, the State confirmed that no recoveries were made from the petitioners, whereas a weapon matching the crime scene evidence was recovered from another co-accused. The Court held that these circumstances rendered the petitioners' case one of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal and granted bail to the petitioners, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court.
- Does the absence of recovery from an accused justify the grant of bail under the principle of further inquiry?
- When does a criminal case fall within the ambit of section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail if a co-accused with similar allegations has been found innocent during the investigation?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 15, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act 2013
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---Petitioners have impugned the order dated 26.02.2021, whereby bail was refused to him by the learned. Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in case FIR No.381 dated 28.05.2020 offence under sections 302, 324, 34, P.P.C. read with section 15 of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Arms Act, 2013, registered at Police Station Lund Khwar , Mardan.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at length and perusal of available record, it has been observed by us that in the incident, Hanif Ullah lost his life whereas complainant Qaim Ullah was injured. It has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the complainant and learned counsel appearing on behalf of State that deceased Hanif Ullah and injured Qaim Ullah received one firearm injury each. It has further been observed by us that the instant case was registered against four persons including the petitioners, out of whom co-accused Zahir Shah with similar allegation has been found innocent. during the course of investigation and his name was placed in column No.2 of the report under section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure. So far as the petitioners are concerned, learned counsel appearing on behalf of State has confirmed that during the course of investigation nothing was recovered at their instance or from their possession. He further confirms under instructions that co- accused Yasir got recovered a pistol and two out of eight empties secured from the spot matched with that pistol.
All these circumstances make the case of petitioners one of further inquiry falling 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. The appellants-Anwar Shaheen and Fakhr-e-Alam are allowed bail (in the instant FIR) subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (one hundred thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- Khair Muhammad Versus State 2026 YLR 1083