ZULFIQAR Versus State
This matter arises from a petition filed by Zulfiqar seeking pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.304 registered under sections 302, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station A-Division, Sheikhupura. The core legal question revolves around whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail when the investigating agency found no overt act or effective firing attributed to him, and no incriminating recovery remained to be made. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and confirmed the pre-arrest bail. The court held that where an accused is not connected with the motive, has not caused any injury, is supported by investigation findings showing mere presence without resorting to firing, and where any potential recovery is legally inconsequential, the extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail ought to be granted to prevent unnecessary deprivation of liberty.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be confirmed when the accused is not connected with the motive and has not caused any injury?
- Does an accused person deserve pre-arrest bail if the investigating agency finds that he was merely present and did not resort to firing?
- Is an accused to be deprived of liberty merely for the purpose of effecting a recovery that is likely to be legally inconsequential?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Through this petition Zulfiqar petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.304 registered at Police Station A-Division, Sheikhupura on 10-7-2004 for offences under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. Earlier on an application submitted by the petitioner before the Court of Session, Sheikhupura seeking the same relief had been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura vide order dated 15-9-2004. Hence, the present petition before this Court.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been observed by me that apparently the petitioner was not connected with the motive set up in the F.I.R. and admittedly the petitioner had not caused any injury to any person during the alleged incident. The allegation levelled against the petitioner in the F.I.R. is only in respect of indulging in ineffective firing. According to the Case-diary No.25, dated 9-102004 it has already been found by the Investigating agency that the petitioner had not resorted to firing at the spot and that he was merely present outside the complainant's house at the time of the alleged occurrence. If that be so, then apparently the petitioner had not committed any overt act during the alleged occurrence. The learned counsel for the State as well as the police officer present with the record have confirmed the fact that the petitioner has already joined the investigation and also that in view of the above mentioned finding of the Investigating agency nothing is to be recovered from his possession. Even otherwise even if any weapon is recovered from the possession of the petitioner the same is likely to be of no consequence inasmuch as it is being alleged that the petitioner was armed with a pistol at the relevant time but no crime-empty of a pistol was recovered from the place of occurrence. An accused person is not to be deprived of his liberty merely for the purpose of effecting a recovery which is likely to be legally inconsequential. It has vehemently agued by the leaned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner happens to be a close friend of the principal accused in this case namely Javed Iqbal and it is on that account that the petitioner, has been falsely implicated in the criminal case in hand so that he may not pursue this case in defence of the principal accused. In the absence of any motive alleged against the petitioner prompting him to participate in the main occurrence this submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner has not appeared to me to be without any substance of foundation.
3. For what has been discussed above this petition is accepted and the ad interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner by this Court vide order dated 14-10-2004 is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing of a fresh bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Area Magistrate of Police Station A-Division, Sheikhupura within a period of two weeks from today.
H.B.T./Z-97/L ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail confirmed.