MUHAMMAD AZAM and others vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan through a petition for leave to appeal seeking post-arrest bail in a case registered under sections 302, 307, 148, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question is whether the fact that police found several co-accused innocent during investigation renders the case against the remaining named petitioners doubtful, thereby entitling them to bail. The Supreme Court held that the mere fact that some persons named in the first information report were found innocent by the police is not sufficient at the bail stage to doubt the active participation of the petitioners, whose names are expressly mentioned in the report and supported by eyewitnesses. The petition was accordingly dismissed, affirming that individual assessment of evidence at the bail stage prevails over police findings regarding other co-accused.
- Does the finding of innocence by police regarding some co-accused make the case against remaining named accused doubtful for bail?
- Are petitioners entitled to post-arrest bail when their names are expressly mentioned in the first information report alongside supporting eyewitness accounts?
- Does police exoneration of certain suspects in the first information report constitute sufficient ground to grant bail to other co-accused?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioners were arrested in a case registered under sections 302 and 307, read with section 148 and section 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Saddar, Wazirabad. The allegations against the petitioners were that they together with a number of other persons formed an unlawful assembly and in the prosecution of the common object of the said assembly they attacked the complainant party killing two persons and injuring four others. At the relevant time the petitioners were carrying fire-arms.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that of the assailants mentioned in the F.I.R. Six have been found innocent and for that reason they have not been arrested by the police. He contends that as the complainant party has falsely implicated a number of innocent persons, its case against the petitioners has also become doubtful.
3. It is difficult to accept the contention of the learned counsel. The names of the petitioners find mention in the F.I.R. And there are a number of eyewitnesses who are prepared to support the version given therein. The fact that six persons mentioned in the F.I.R. Have been found innocent by the police is by itself not a sufficient ground at this stage to cast doubt upon the participation of the petitioners in the occurrence. In the circumstances no case for bail has been made out. The petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 5 cases
- Shaikh Ghulam Murtaza Adv vs The State 2023 SHC 890
- The State through Advocate General K.P.K vs Zahoor-ur-Rahman 2017 PHC
- State Versus ZAHOOR-UR-RAHMAN alias ZAHOOR 2017 YLRN 137
- MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus FATEH BIBI 1996 PCRLJ 753
- MUHAMMAD ASHRAF vs MUHAMMAD ISMAIL And Others 1992 P Cr. L J 1671