DHANI BUX and others vs THE STATE
This is a petition for leave to appeal directed against the order of the Sind High Court, which refused to grant post-arrest bail to the petitioners in a case involving murder and arms offenses under sections 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code and Section 13-D of the Arms Ordinance. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given the circumstances of the case, including their nomination in the First Information Report, specific attribution of roles, supporting statements of eyewitnesses under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and a clear motive related to a matrimonial dispute. The Supreme Court held that the concurrent findings and the view taken by the High Court refusing bail were unexceptionable. The Court laid down that where a prima facie case is established through prompt reporting, specific identification, supporting eyewitness accounts, and a discernible motive for an offense punishable with death or imprisonment for life, post-arrest bail is rightly declined.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when the accused are specifically named in the FIR with attributed roles for an offense punishable with death or imprisonment for life?
- Is the existence of a strong motive and supporting statements under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure sufficient to establish a prima facie case for the refusal of bail?
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with the concurrent refusal of bail by the lower courts when no illegality or perversity is shown in their orders?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 13-D, Arms Ordinance
- Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the order of a learned Judge of Sind High Court dated 20-10-1987 refusing petitioners' request for grant of bail pending their trial in a case under sections 302/34, P.P.C. And 13-D of Arms Ordinance.
2. ' The report of the incident in the case was lodged by Khuda Bux at Sultan Kot Police Station on 23- 6-1987 at 6 a.m., incident having occurred some time during the night. According to the version of the occurrence stated in F.I.R., first informant along with Mirza and Dur Muhammad was sleeping near their house, while his son Shah Nawaz (deceased) was sleeping at the nearby tube-well. He woke up on the barking of dogs and went towards the tube-well where he found the four petitioners armed with weapons, in that, Dhani Bux and Wahid Bux had lathies, Lali a hatchet and Jaro was carrying a pistol. He enquired from them as to the purpose with which they had come, whereupon Jaro petitioner fired a pistol shot at his son and all of them gave challenge that any one approaching would be done to death. The motive for the crime was mentioned by the assailants themselves that they were killing Shah Nawaz as he was against the marriage of his sister to Wahid Bux petitioner.
3. ' Petitioners initially approached Sessions Court, Shikarpur for grant of bail but their request was refused by the Additional Sessions Judge for these reasons:- "I have heard the learned counsel and perused the police papers and find that the names of the accused persons are mentioned in. The F.I.R. It is alleged that due to matrimonial dispute the accused persons had murdered the son of the complainant in furtherance of their common intention and all of them are vicariously liable for the offence. The torch was recovered by the police under mashirnama from the complainant. The offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The P.Ws. Mirzan and Dur Muhammad have supported the case in their 164 Cr.P.C. Statements. I therefore in the above circumstances do not fmd any reasonable ground for the grant of bail at this stage. Consequently the bail is rejected."
4. ' Learned Judge in the High Court who dealt with the same request, rejected it for these reasons:-- "I have considered the contentions of both the learned counsel for applicants and State as well as the submissions made by the complainant's advocate. The motive attributed is sufficient and each one of the accused is identified and named in the F.I.R. Prosecution witnesses have fully supported the prosecution case. The very fact that the applicants, three of whom Wahid Ali alias Wahid Bux, Lali and Jaro are brothers inter se and the fourth applicant is also their relation and due to matrimonial they came to the place of incident armed with weapons and caused death of deceased Shah Nawaz. The source of identification is prominently mentioned in the F.I.R. And the prosecution witnesses in their statements before police and in 164, Cr.P.C. Statements have implicated the applicants and there are circumstances available making out prima facie case against the applicants for having acted in furtherance of their common intention to kill the son of the complainant."
5. After having gone through the record of the case in the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, which were identical to those raised in the High Court, we find no exception whatsoever with the view that had been taken in the High Court.
6. ' For these reasons there is no merit in this petition, and it is dismissed.
Cited by 4 cases
- NIAZ ALI SHAH vs The STATE and another 2015 P Cr. L J 766
- ALI NAWAZ vs THE STATE 1993 P Cr. L J 2390
- LOUNG vs YAR ALI and another 1993 P Cr. L J 1256
- WAZIR and 2 others vs THE STATE 1993 P Cr. L J 1007