MUHAMMAD SADIQ vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioners' application for post-arrest bail in a criminal case registered under sections 148, 452, 302, and 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail despite allegations of their involvement in a violent attack on the complainant's house, which resulted in the death of one person and injuries to others. The Supreme Court held that the petition for leave to appeal should be dismissed. The Court reasoned that the petitioners and their co-accused allegedly launched a coordinated attack on the victims within their own home. The Court found no sufficient grounds to interfere with the High Court's order, emphasizing the gravity of the allegations and the circumstances of the incident. The judgment reinforces the principle that where a prima facie case of a violent, premeditated attack is established, particularly involving multiple assailants acting in concert, the court is generally disinclined to grant bail at the pre-trial stage.
- Is bail appropriate when petitioners are alleged to have participated in a coordinated attack on a private residence resulting in death and injury?
- Does the absence of a specific injury attribution in a post-mortem report automatically entitle an accused to bail in a multi-accused criminal case?
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J.---Muhammad Sadiq and Fateh Alam petitioners seek leave to appeal from the order of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 9-3-1994 whereby their petition for bail in a case registered against them and others under sections 148, 452, 302 and 324 of the P. P. C . Was dismissed.
2. The F.I.R. Version was that on 25-5-1993 at about Isha prayer time Ghazanfar Ali deceased, Shafqat Ali P.W. And Azmat Ali complainant were sitting in the courtyard. Of their house on cots when Abid Hussain and Jan Muhammad alias Azam armed with 222 bore rifles, Muhammad Sadiq, Abdul Khali(' and Abdul Aziz armed with .12 bore guns and Fateh Alam armed with 7 MM rifle trespassed into the house and simultaneously Abid Hussain fired his rifle hitting Ghazanfar Ali deceased in the left fore-arm followed by another fire on Shafqat Ali hitting the thumb of his left hand. The third fire of Abid Hussain landed on the left thigh of Shafqat Ali, Jan Muhammad fired at Ghazandar hitting his nose. Ghazanfar Ali tried to run when Fateh Alam petitioner fired at him from behind causing an exit wound in the chest. Fateh Alam petitioner again fired at Shafqat Ali hitting the back of the left hand. Muhammad Sadiq petitioner fired at the complainant hitting his right thigh. Thereafter, the accused persons went away firing in the air.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that no injury to the deceased has been attributed to Muhammad Sadiq while the fire of Fateh Alam which allegedly caused the exit wound on the chest of the deceased finds no mention in the post-mortem report, After considering the submissions of the learned counsel in the light of material available on the record we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. The allegation is that the petitioners and their co-accused launched attack on the deceased and injured P.Ws. Right in their house where they peacefully sitting and talking with each other. In the circumstances no ground for interference with the impugned order is made out. The petition is dismissed.