Pakistan Case Law
1996 SCMR 1654

MUHAMMAD SADIQ and anothers vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1996 SCMR 1654
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition No,2 of 1994
Date1994-02-21
Judge(s)Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and Manzoor Hussain Sial
Authored byAbdul Qadeer Chaudhry
ResultAppeal dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal concerning criminal charges under sections 302, 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, where the petitioners were accused alongside others of murder and attempt to commit murder, specifically being armed with a pistol and a .7 mm rifle and raising Lalkara. The core legal question is whether the petitioners are entitled to post-arrest bail given the specific nature of the allegations and lack of attributable injuries. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that since no injuries were caused by the weapons attributed to the petitioners and the allegation of Lalkara is proverbial, the petitioners have made out a case for further inquiry. The Court laid down the principle that where weapons carried by accused persons yield no corresponding injuries on the victims and general allegations like Lalkara require further assessment at trial, bail ought to be granted.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether an accused person is entitled to post-arrest bail when no specific injuries are attributed to the weapon he was allegedly armed with?
  • Does an allegation of raising a Lalkara, when treated as proverbial and unsupported by specific injury attribution, warrant the grant of bail?
  • When does a criminal case fall under the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 based on weapon attribution?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
post-arrest bailmurderattempt to commit murderproverbial Lalkarafurther inquiry

ORDER

' ABDUL QADEER CHAUDHRY, J.---The petitioners alongwith others were charged under section 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. According to the First Information Report Muhammad Sadiq, petitioner No,1, was armed with pistol. Both Asif Iqbal and Talib Hussain were armed with .12 bore guns, Sabir Hussain armed with a carbine, Islam-ul-Haq, petitioner No,2, armed with a .7 mm rifle and Arif Iqbal armed with a .30 bore pistol. Asif Iqbal fired a shot at the deceased, and the pellets thereof hit his face, chest and neck. Sabir Hussain then fired at the complainant. Talib Hussain also fired a shot which hit Muhammad Israr a witness and the deceased Muhammad Humayon. The allegation against Muhammad Sadiq and Islam-ul-Haq, the present petitioners, are that they kept on firing and raising Lalkara.

2. There is no injury by means of pistol and .7 mm rifle. The allegation of Lalkara against the petitioners is proverbial. Though the petitioners were stated to be armed with pistol and rifle, but they did not cause any injury to the complainant party. The petitioners are admitted to bail. They be released, if each of them furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with two sureties each in the alike amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi.

Cited by 17 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.