MUHAMMAD SHAHID Versus State
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the accused, Muhammad Shahid and Azra Shakeel, who were charged with the abduction and murder of the complainant's brother. The core legal question was whether, given the evidentiary gaps and the nature of the prosecution's case, there existed reasonable grounds to believe the applicants were guilty of the alleged offence. The Court observed that the recovery of incriminating evidence, specifically blood-stained stones, occurred two months after the dead body was discovered at the same location, and the pointing out of crime scenes by the accused yielded no new discoveries as police had already inspected those sites. Furthermore, the co-accused who implicated the applicants had reportedly been maltreated by the police, a fact acknowledged by the complainant. Holding that the prosecution's case did not establish reasonable grounds of guilt, the Court determined the matter required further inquiry. Consequently, the Court granted post-arrest bail to the applicants, establishing the principle that where evidence is weak or discovery is redundant, the case falls under the purview of further inquiry, warranting the grant of bail.
- Does the pointing out of a crime scene by an accused carry evidentiary value if the police have already inspected the location?
- When does a criminal case qualify for 'further inquiry' under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be granted where the recovery of incriminating material is delayed and questionable?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J .---Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned State counsel. The latter has conceded to the grant of bail.
2. According to the prosecution, on 27-1-2008, at 2200 hours, two persons, armed with pistol, abducted complainant Ahmed's brother Shakeel from New Karachi, while he and his wife, applicant Azra Shakeel, were on their way to their home. Applicant Azra Shakeel informed complainant Ahmed about the incident, who reported the matter to police on the next day i.e. on 28-1-2008 and his report was registered at Police Station, New Karachi 'Industrial Area, as F.I.R. No.22 of 2008 on 28-1-2008, at 1315 hours, mentioning that two unknown persons had abducted his brother Shakeel on gunpoint.
3. On 29-1-2008, at about 1830 hours, police of Police Station, Surjani Town found a dead body of an unknown man aged about 30/35 years, lying in the bushes near Al-Falah Mosque. Such F.I.R. No.37 of 2008 was registered at Police Station, Surjani Town on the same day at 2300 hours. Since the dead body was not identified and was not claimed by anybody it was buried as unclaimed dead body, after its post mortem examination.
4. On 11-2-2008, applicant Azra in her further statement told police that as a matter of fact complainant Ahmed was involved in the kidnapping and murder of his brother and her husband deceased Shakeel, as 'he wanted to marry her. On the basis of her such statement, complainant Ahmed and his friend Muhammad Hussain were arrested on 13-2-2008, but both were released on 21-2-2008, as in the opinion of the Investigating Officer they were not involved in the commission of the offence.
5. On 27-3-2008, co-accused Muhammad Nadir informed police that applicant Muhammad Shahid and his brother Muhammad `Waseem had abducted and killed the deceased as Muhammad Shahid had illicit relations with the applicant Azra. On the basis of his statement, applicants Muhammad Shahid and Azra were arrested on the next day i.e. on 28-3-2008 and on the same day they are shown to have led police to the place from where the deceased was abducted and the place from where the dead body was secured. From the latter place blood-stained stones used for killing the deceased were also secured. Applicants' pointing out the place from where the deceased was abducted and the place from where his dead body was secured carries no evidentiary value as both the places had already been inspected by police and no fact was discovered in consequence of the information given by them. Recovery of blood stained stones after two months from the same place from where the dead body was secured also requires further inquiry. Learned counsel for the applicants has also pointed out that co-accused Muhammad Nadir, on the basis of whose statement the present applicants were arrested, had been maltreated by police and the complainant has himself stated, in his examination-in -chief, that co-accused Muhammad Nadir had implicated them because the investigating officer had maltreated him.
6. In view of the above facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that there are reasonable grounds to believe the applicants guilty of the offence and the matter requires only further inquiry as contemplated by subsection (2) of sec tion 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Accordingly, the applicants are directed to be released on bail each on giving one surety in the sum of Rs.100,000 and personal bond in the like amount to the trial court.
H.B.T./M-56/K Bail granted.