SHER KHAN Versus State
The Supreme Court of Pakistan heard an appeal against the Peshawar High Court's order dated 11.07.2025, which dismissed the petitioner's post-arrest bail petition in a case registered under Sections 302, 324, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The primary legal question concerned whether an accused is entitled to post-arrest bail on the ground of further inquiry where cross-versions exist and individual liability cannot be conclusively fixed at the bail stage. The Supreme Court observed that the petitioner was assigned a joint role with a co-accused without attribution of any specific fatal injury, no weapon was recovered from him, and the forensic report matched crime empties to a single weapon. Moreover, the petitioner's son sustained multiple firearm injuries during the occurrence, leading to both parties being challaned in cross-versions. The Court held that determining the actual aggressor requires evidence at trial, making the case one of further inquiry. It further reiterated that the disparity in casualties or the gravity of injuries between opposing parties is irrelevant at the bail stage. Consequently, the petition was converted into an appeal, the High Court's order set aside, and post-arrest bail granted.
- Whether the existence of cross-versions and injury to the accused party renders a case one of further inquiry for the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Can post-arrest bail be granted when a joint firing role is alleged without attribution of specific injuries and crime empties match only a single weapon?
- Is the disparity in the number of deceased or injured persons between opposing parties relevant when deciding bail in a cross-version case?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
MALIK SHAHZAD AHMAD KHAN, J.--- Through the instant petition, Sher Khan, petitioner, has assailed the judgment dated 11.07.2025 passed by the learned Peshawar High Court, Bannu Bench, with the prayer to set aside the said order and grant post-arrest bail to him in case registered vide FIR No. 66 dated 30.03.2025 under Sections 302/324/34 P.P.C., at Police Station Haved, District Bannu.
2. Arguments heard. Record perused.
3. As per contents of the FIR, on 29.03.2025 at about 6.40 p.m, Sher Khan (petitioner) along with his co-accused while armed with different weapons launched an attack upon the complainant party and committed murder of Muhammad-Ullah and Asim Khan (deceased), while causing firearm injuries on their bodies. The complainant further alleged that during the occurrence, on account of firing of the accused party, the son of the petitioner namely Nauman also received firearm injuries on his body, hence the FIR of this case.
4. A joint role was assigned to Sher Khan (petitioner) and Asghar Ali (co-accused since P.O) of making fire shots with Kalashnikov, which landed on the bodies of the abovementioned two deceased persons, namely Muhammad-Ullah and Asim Khan. No specific injury on the body of any deceased has been assigned to the petitioner. As per police record, no weapon has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner during the investigation of this case. According to the report of FSL, the empties recovered from the spot were found to be fired from one weapon. It is not determinable at this stage that as to whether any fire shot made by the petitioner landed on the body of either of the deceased.
5. Furthermore, the son of the petitioner namely Nauman was admittedly injured during the occurrence and this fact has also been mentioned in the FIR. Though the complainant stated in the FIR that the above-mentioned Nauman received injuries on account of firing of the accused party but we have noted that the the accused party has also lodged a cross-version and according to the Investigating Officer both the parties have been challaned in the State, as well as, cross-version case. The abovementioned Nauman was medically examined on the day of occurrence and according to his medico legal report, there were five entry and exit wounds on his body. There were firearm entry and exit wounds on his chest and there were multiple firearm wounds on his legs. As it is a cross-version case, therefore, it will be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of evidence that as to who was the aggressor and who was aggressed upon and as such the prosecution case against the petitioner is one of further inquiry entitling the petitioner to the grant of post arrest bail. It has next been argued by learned Addl. Prosecutor General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant that there is only a single injured of the cross-version, whereas on the other hand two persons lost their lives in the State case but number of injured or deceased on either side or receiving of minor injuries or grievous/fatal injuries of any party is not relevant at bail stage as observed in the judgments reported as "Hamza Ali Hamza and others v. The State" (2010 SCMR 1219), "Muhammad Boota v. The State and others" (2014 SCMR 1355) and "Syed Darbar Ali Shah and others v. The State" (2015 SCMR 879).
6. Consequently, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. The impugned order is set aside. The petitioner is granted post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (one million) with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
JK/S-41/SC Bail granted.