YASEEN Versus STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the cancellation of bail of the petitioners who were involved in a case registered under sections 302, 429, 149, 109, and 148 of the Pakistan Penal Code for forming an unlawful assembly, firing at the complainant party, and causing a death and the killing of an animal. The petitioners were initially granted bail by the High Court based on favorable police investigation reports. Subsequently, the High Court cancelled their bail due to the registration of subsequent FIRs indicating that the petitioners were intimidating and assaulting members of the complainant party. The core legal question concerned the propriety of the cancellation of bail for misuse of concession. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal for certain petitioners and granted them bail subject to surety bonds, while refusing leave for the remaining petitioners. The key principle laid down is that post-arrest bail may be cancelled if the accused abuses the concession of bail by intimidating or assaulting the complainant party.
- Can bail once granted be cancelled if the accused abuses the concession by intimidating the complainant party?
- Whether subsequent registration of FIRs against the accused for intimidation constitutes sufficient ground for bail cancellation?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 429, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code
ORDER
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.- -The petitioners are involved in a case registered under sections 302 and 429, read with sections 149 and 109, and section 148 of the Pakistan Penal Code on the allegations that on 15-3-1984, at 7 a.m., they formed an unlawful assembly with the object of forcibly taking over possession of some land of the complainant party and in prosecution of the said object they fired indiscriminately at the complainant party resulting in the death of one Faiz Muhammad and the killing of a calf. It appears from the record that proceedings under section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, had been earlier conducted by a Magistrate who found Muhammad Afzal, an alleged member of the accused party, to be in possession thereof. The investigation was conducted by different officers and they all formed opinions favourable to the petitioners. In the circumstances by an order dated 16-8-1984 they were admitted to bail by the High Court. Subsequently, a number of F. I.Rs. were registered against the petitioners which indicated that they were intimidating and assaulting the members of the complainant party. Taking notice of these F.I.Rs. a learned Single Judge in the High Court by an order dated 21-1-1987 cancelled the bail granted to them on the ground that they were abusing the concession. Subsequently, the petitioners moved another application for bail but it was dismissed by the same learned Judge.
2. This petition is barred by 110 days. There is an application for condonation of delay. For the reasons stated therein, the delay is condoned.
3. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the complainant party and Mr.S.D.Qureshi on behalf of the State, we convert this petition into appeal in so far as Muhammad Aslam son of Dost Muhammad, Yaseen son of Mirza and Dost Muhammad son of Mohammad Ali are concerned and direct that they will not be arrested B if they furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Mandi Bahauddin. So far as the other petitioners are concerned, leave is refused.
M.I./Y-10/S ???? ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.