RIAZ Versus THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.331 of 2000 registered under sections 302, 148, 149, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Qabula, District Pakpattan Sharif. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was not named in the F.I.R. and whose only alleged role was instigation or exhortation based on a subsequent police diary entry without direct participation in the occurrence, was entitled to post-arrest bail. The Lahore High Court held that since the petitioner was neither named in the F.I.R. nor present at the place of occurrence, and no overt act or physical participation was attributed other than alleged incitement, his case fell within the scope of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the court admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that where an accused is not named in the F.I.R. and is implicated solely through a subsequent police diary for alleged instigation without participating in the actual crime, his case warrants further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail.
- Whether an accused not named in the FIR and connected only through a subsequent police diary for instigation is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does the mere allegation of exhortation without physical participation in the crime bring the case within the scope of further inquiry?
- Can bail be granted when the State fails to point out incriminating material connecting the petitioner to the alleged offense?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. Through this bail petition, Riaz accused has sought post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.331 of 2000 registered under sections 302/148/149/109, P.P.C. with Police Station Qabula District Pakpattan Sharif.
2. According to the F.I.R. lodged on 11‑10‑2000 at about 7‑30 p.m. Shahbaz etc. accused five nominated persons alongwith two unknown persons armed with pistol hockey and Sotas committed the murder of Irshad due to the grievance that he had restrained the accused party from teasing the girls. The petitioner was arrested due to the reasons that Altaf Hussain etc. accused had stated during investigation that they murdered Irshad deceased at the instigation of Riaz petitioner vide Diary No.6, dated 24‑10‑2000.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R. nor the P.Ws. have implicated him in their statements recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C.; further argued that no incriminating material has been brought on the police file to involve him in the charge of murder.
4. The State Counsel has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner but could not point out any material collected by the police to connect the petitioner.
5. Heard.
6. The petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R. nor his presence at the place of occurrence, is substantiated by the contents of th6 F.I.R. Only Diary No.6 recorded on 24‑10‑2000 by the police during investigation indicates that Riaz, petitioner, instigated the accused party to avenge the insult of Shahbaz at the hands of Irshad Kharal from the complainant party, whereupon, the occurrence took place. The petitioner has been arrested subsequently on the allegation that he exhorted the accused party. Admittedly, the petitioner did not participate in the occurrence and no role is attributed to him except the incitement. Therefore, the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry.
7. In the circumstances, the petitioner is admittedly to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rs. one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
8. H. B. T./R‑62/L ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.