Mukhtiar Hussain alias Mukhtiar Ahmed vs The State
This criminal bail application was filed before the Sindh High Court under Section 498-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered for murder committed through indiscriminate firing by an unlawful assembly. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to pre-arrest bail on grounds of delay in the FIR, being found innocent during police investigation, and lack of a specific attributed injury. The Court held that the applicant was not entitled to pre-arrest bail, dismissing the application upon finding reasonable grounds to believe the applicant was guilty, noting that police opinion of innocence is not binding, and holding that indiscriminate firing by the assembly made individual attribution unnecessary at the bail stage. The key principles laid down are that a police opinion finding an accused innocent during investigation has no binding effect on the court, and that participation in indiscriminate firing by an unlawful assembly prima facie connects the accused to the crime, negating a case for further inquiry at the pre-arrest stage.
- Whether an accused is entitled to pre-arrest bail solely on the ground that he was found innocent during the police investigation?
- Does a delay of a few hours in lodging an FIR for murder automatically justify the grant of pre-arrest bail?
- Can pre-arrest bail be granted on the basis of further inquiry when the accused is alleged to have participated in indiscriminate firing as part of an unlawful assembly?
- Section 498-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J. Over ruled.
2. Granted subject to all just legal exceptions.
3. It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of its common object committed murder of Shahzado by causing him fire shot injuries, for that the present case was registered.
2(sic) The applicant, on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge/(MCTC), Khairpur, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant Crl. Bail Application under section 498-A, Cr.P.C.
3(sic). It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant in order to satisfy his old enmity with him; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about 05 hours; no specific injury to the deceased is attributed to the applicant and he on investigation has been let off by the police finding him to be innocent; therefore, he is entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and mala fide. In support of his contention, he relied upon case of Babar Nadeem v. The State through P.G Punjab and another (2020 SCMR 1253).
4. Learned Additional P.G for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that he has actively participated in commission of incident by making indiscriminate firing at the deceased. In support of their contention they relied upon case of Mst. Qudrat Bibi v. Muhammad lqbal and another (2023 SCMR 68).
5. Heard arguments and perused the record.
6. The applicant is named in FIR with an allegation that he with rest of the culprits after having formed an unlawful assembly and in prosecution of its common object went over to the complainant party and committed murder of the deceased by causing him fire shot injuries. The deceased in all was found sustaining 15 fire shot injuries. It was indiscriminate firing; therefore, it would be hard to specify as to which of the injury was caused to the deceased by the applicant.
The delay of few hours in lodgment of the FIR in case like present one was natural, same even otherwise could not be resolved by this Court at this stage. No doubt, the applicant on investigation was let off by the police by disbelieving the version of the complainant and his witnesses. It was unjustified act on the part of the police. Even otherwise the opinion of the police has got no binding effect upon the Court. It would be premature to say that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party. There appear reasonable grounds to believe that the applicant is guilty of the offence with which he is charged and no case for grant of pre- arrest bail to him on point of further inquiry or mala fide is made out.
7. The case law which is relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant is on distinguishable facts and circumstances. In that case the accused was abettor. In the instant matter, the applicant is alleged to have made indiscriminate firing at the deceased with rest of the culprits.
8. In view of above, the instant bail application is dismissed.