KABEER vs THE STATE
This is a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, Kabeer, who was charged under Sections 364, 302, 201, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 in connection with the abduction and murder of his brother, Sher Muhammad. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner conspired with and abetted his co-accused, Muhammad Ramzan, who purportedly committed the murder by inflicting fatal blows and disposing of the body in a canal. The core legal question before the Lahore High Court was whether the petitioner, whose alleged role was limited to conspiracy and abetment, was entitled to bail pending trial. The Court observed that the evidence of extra-judicial confession relied upon by the prosecution was weak. Furthermore, relying on established precedents, the Court held that an accused whose involvement is limited to abetment of murder is entitled to bail, as the case against him warrants further inquiry. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to the furnishing of a bail bond, thereby affirming the principle that allegations of abetment in capital offences often necessitate further judicial scrutiny before trial.
- Is an accused person whose alleged role is limited to conspiracy and abetment of murder entitled to bail?
- Does the reliance on extra-judicial confession as the primary evidence against an accused render a case one of further inquiry?
- Can an accused charged with abetment under Section 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 be granted bail pending trial?
- Section 364, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 201, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Kabeer petitioner has moved this application for bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,300 of 1996 registered on 11-11-1996 under section 364/302/ 201/109, P.P.C. At Police Station Tulamba, District Khanewal.
2. The prosecution case is that on 11-11-1996 Muhammad Amir complainant made a statement at Police Station Talumba that they were five brothers including Sher Muhammad deceased and were living in the same house. On 8-11-1996 at about 9-00 p.m. In order to ask his sister-in-law for plucking cotton he went to the house of his brother, where all three of them had been talking with each other. In the meantime Sher Muhammad his brother left the house saying that he was going to Noor Muhammad Sial to enquire about the welfare Of his ailing wife. He and his brother went to sleep at their respective houses. In the morning his brother Kabir told him that Sher Muhammad had not returned in the night. Whereupon, both of them visited the Bhani of Noor Muhammad Sial and on their enquiry they told them that Sher Muhammad had not come to him. In the meanwhile.
Ghulam Hussain son of Ghulam Farid came there and told them that at about 9-30 p.m. Last night, Sher Muhammad alongwith another person whom he could not identify, were going towards Mailsi Link Canal. Thereupon, he alongwith his brother Kabir and Ghulam Hussain aforesaid and Bahadar proceeded towards Mailsi Link. There they saw on the bank of canal a shoe of the left foot of Sher Muhammad lying. The signs of dragging a person were also existing at the spot. They hectically searched for Sher Muhammad, their brother, but could not find him out and they were sure that he had been abducted or murdered.
3. During the investigation it was found that the deceased had been murdered by Muhammad Rarnzan co-accused who had inflicted Sota blows to Sher Muhammad deceased and thrown him down in the canal and he did this all at the behest of Kabir petitioner.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. There is the evidence of extra-judicial confession made by the petitioner before Khuda Bukhsh, Bahadar Ali, Amir and Aslam and such kind of evidence is weak. Besides that, it is established on record that the petitioner indulged only in conspiracy and abetting the offence of murder done by his co-accused Muhammad Ramzan. In view of the law laid down in Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Law and another v. Gul Hasan Khan PLD 1989 SC 633, and Maratab Ali v. The State 1997 PCr.LJ 1183 the accused alleged to have indulged only in abetment of offence of murder, is held entitled to bail and the case being rendered as that of further enquiry. In view of the law laid down as above and the discussion thereof the instant case is held to be that of further enquiry.
Consequentially, the petitioner is held entitled to bail.
6. Kabir petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned.
Cited by 5 cases
- Haji MUHAMMAD YOUSAF vs STATE and another PLJ 2005 Cr.C. (Peshawar) 1182
- Haji MUHAMMAD YOUSAF vs THE STATE and another 2005 YLR 2418
- MUHAMMAD BASHIR GURAYA vs Raja MUHAMMAD IRSHAD and another 2005 YLR 1220
- MUHAMMAD HASSAN and anothers vs THE STATE 2001 P Cr. L J 710
- Malik MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs Syed ABID HUSSAIN SHAH and 9 others 2000 P Cr. L J 1171