ALI MUHAMMAD vs The STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Ali Muhammad against the refusal of bail by the High Court in a case involving charges under sections 302, 307, and 148/149 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question is whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail on grounds of delay in commitment proceedings, advanced age, and alleged lack of incriminating evidence regarding membership of an unlawful assembly. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the High Court properly exercised its discretion in refusing bail, particularly given that the petitioner was apprehended at the scene of the crime inside the raided house. The key principle laid down is that where an accused is arrested directly at the spot during a police raid, bail may be properly refused by the superior courts.
- Whether an accused arrested at the spot during a police raid is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does delay in commitment proceedings automatically entitle an accused facing serious criminal charges to bail?
- Can advanced age alone serve as a sufficient ground for granting bail in heinous offences?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-The petitioner has been implicated in a case under sections 30 2, 307, 148/ 149, P. P. C. And is in the judicial lock-up since 16th February 1972. According to the First Information Report, secret information was received that Fazal Dad and Jahangir proclaimed offenders were present in the house of Asghar, situated in village Gidar Kot. A raiding party was formed. Ch. Khan and Muhammad Amin Constables, who were also the members of the raiding party, reported that 11 persons including A.I Muhammad petitioner were present in the house of Ghulam Qadir. The said house was surrounded by the police party. Chaudhry Khan and Muhammad Amin Constables climbed the ladder in order to bolt the door of the choubara in which the said persons were present. Mst. Ghulam Fatima and Mst. Hakim Bibi who were present in the courtyard informed the accused that the police had arrived. Fazal Dad fired a shot at Muhammad Amin and Muhammad Ashraf and others also fired at him. Jahangir also fired a shot on Choudhry Khan Constable but he could not be hit. Khalid gave butt blow to Choudhry Khan Constable. The accused threw hand grenade and opened firing at the police party and the police party also made firing. As a result of police firing. Ghulam Hussain died Ghulam Rasul, Ghulam Nabi and Muhammad Akram and' the petitioner were arrested at the spot while other accused ran away.
2. The petitioner applied for bail to the learned Sessions Judge, Gujrat which was rejected on the 6th April 1971. Thereafter he moved three applications for bail in the High Court but they were also rejected. The petitioner seeks permission to file an appeal against the said orders.
3. Mr. Maqsood Hassan, learned counsel for the petitioner, has contended that there is delay in the commitment proceedings and the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. He further submitted that the petitioner is an old man of about 80 years and a respectable citizen who had never committed any offence in his whole life. It is contended that there is no evidence against the petitioner that he was in the house with a criminal motive or intention or that he was a member of unlawful assembly.
4. Without going into the merits of the case, we are satisfied that the High Court has exercised the discretion vested in it properly. The petitioner was arrested from the house. In those circumstances, the bail was rightly refused to him. The petition is dismissed.