LAL MUHAMMAD vs THE STATE
This petition for leave to appeal arises from an order of the Baluchistan High Court, which dismissed the petitioner's request for post-arrest bail in a case involving charges under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and Section 17(4) of the Offences against Property (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance 1979. The petitioner, accused of murder and robbery, sought bail primarily on the grounds that his name was absent from the First Information Report and that the prosecution's case relied solely on the confessional statements of co-accused persons. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the evidentiary material available during the investigation. The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the record and investigation papers, held that the High Court had not violated any legal provisions or principles governing bail in such serious offenses. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition, affirming that the lower courts correctly determined that a prima facie case existed against the petitioner, thereby disentitling him to the grant of bail at this stage of the proceedings.
- Is an accused entitled to bail solely because their name is omitted from the First Information Report?
- Can the confessional statement of a co-accused constitute sufficient material to establish a prima facie case for the purpose of refusing bail?
- Does the existence of a prima facie case disentitle an accused from the grant of bail in non-bailable offenses?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 17(4), Offences against Property (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
1. ' ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal from the order of a learned Judge of Baluchistan High Court dated 31-1-1989 dismissing petitioner's request for release on bail pending trial of a case against him under section 302/34, P.P.C. Read with section 17(4) of Offences against Property (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979. Facts of the case are as under: ' On the night between Ist and 2nd October, 1988, it is said that 5 persons trespassed into the house of Abdul Karim (deceased) and on gun point demanded money and jewellery from him. On his refusal the culprits committed murder of Abdul Karim and his two sons. The crime was reported by Bibi Hoor widow of Abdul Karim with Saddar Police Station, Quetta. During the investigation 5 persons namely, Lal Mohammad petitioner, Mohammad Aslam, Mian Khan, Rozi Khan and Abdul Wahid were arrested. Petitioner applied for release on bail on the ground that his name is not mentioned in the F.I.R. And the only evidence available with the prosecution consists of confessional statements of co-accused Mohammad Aslam and Mian Khan which cannot sustain his guilt on the charges levelled against him. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Quetta rejected petitioner's request for bail on the ground that "a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner which disentitles him from the grant of the bail." Thereafter, petitioner approached the High Court with the same request but it was also rejected by the impugned order mentioned above.
2. ' After having gone through the record of the case and the investigation papers made available by the learned. Advocate-General we find that in refusing to release the petitioner on bail at this stage, learned Judge in the High Court has not violated any legal provision or principle of law governing bail in cases such as this. The petition is therefore dismissed.
Cited by 6 cases
- MUHAMMAD SHAHID AKBAR Versus State 2017 YLRN 141
- SHARBAT HUSSAIN Versus The STATE through Advocate-General, A.K. Muzaffarabad 2017 PCrLJN 76
- State Versus NIAMAT WALI 2016 GBLR 127
- SHAIKH MUHAMMAD Versus State 2013 YLR 248
- MUHAMMAD ASIF Versus State 2011 YLR 1639
- MUHAMMAD ASHRAF vs MUHAMMAD ISMAIL And Others 1992 P Cr. L J 1671