MUHAMMAD JAMIL vs SHAUKAT ALI and another
This petition is directed against the order of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 10-11-1994, whereby respondent Shaukat Ali was granted post-arrest bail in a murder case under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question concerns the sufficiency of 'last-seen' evidence to sustain detention and deny bail where no direct evidence connects the accused to the crime and the exact time of the murder is unknown. The Supreme Court held that the last-seen evidence, placing the accused and the deceased together days prior and at a distance from the crime scene, was insufficient to exclude the hypothesis of the innocence of the accused. The Court concluded that the reasons given by the High Court for granting bail were fully convincing and accordingly refused leave to appeal. The key principle laid down is that weak or distant last-seen circumstantial evidence, which fails to establish close proximity in time and space to the offense, warrants the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Is last-seen evidence that fails to place the accused and deceased in sufficient proximity of time and space sufficient to deny post-arrest bail?
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with a well-reasoned order of the High Court granting post-arrest bail in the absence of compelling grounds?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
MUHAMMAD MUNIR.KHAN, J.---This petition is directed against the order of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, dated 10-11-1994, whereby Shaukat Ali respondent No,1 has been allowed post-arrest bail in case under section 302, P.P.C. For the murder of Muhammad Shakeel for the reasons that "the Inspector/SHO present in Court has stated that during investigation no other evidence could be collected and same is the opinion of the last Investigating Officer that despite efforts and having joined other persons in investigation, no further evidence could be gathered. The evidence of last-seen does not place the accused and the deceased in sufficient proximity to the time and space qua the offence of murder".
2. After hearing the learned counsel, we find that there is no direct evidence against the respondent No,1. The dead body of Shakeel was found near a Nullah on 17-11-1993. Muhammad Rashid P.W.4, appeared before the police on 21-11-1993 and stated that he had seen Shakeel and the respondent No,1 together in a Suzuki van in the Bazar of Kallar Syedan on 11-11-1993. The bazar of Kallar Syedan is not near to the place where the dead body was found. The exact time of the murder is not known.In this view of the matter e feel that the last seen evidence collected by the police during the investigation may not be sufficient enough to exclude the hypothesis of the innocence of the accused. The reasons given by the High Court for the grant of bail are fully convincing. No case for interference with the well-reasoned order of the High Court is made out.
3. Accordingly, leave to appeal is refused.