GHULAM RASUL vs THE STATE
This is a criminal petition for post-arrest bail arising from F.I.R. No. 189 of 1997 registered under sections 302/34 and other provisions of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Saddar Vehari. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, an 87-year-old accused involved in a sudden cross-version fight resulting in a death after seventeen days, was entitled to post-arrest bail under the principle of further inquiry. The Lahore High Court held that the incident stemmed from a sudden fight where the element of mens rea was doubtful, and considering the advanced age of the petitioner, the nature of injuries, and the period already spent in custody, the case warranted further inquiry. The court admitted the petitioner to bail subject to furnishing surety bonds. The key principle laid down is that in cases involving sudden fights with cross-versions, doubtful mens rea, advanced age, and prolonged incarceration, the accused is entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Whether bail can be granted when a case involves a sudden fight and cross-versions requiring further inquiry into the petitioner's involvement?
- Does advanced age of the accused constitute a ground for grant of post-arrest bail in a murder case?
- Whether the absence of immediate fatal weapons attributed to an accused in a sudden flare-up brings the case within the scope of further inquiry?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
'Petitioner has been proceeded against vide F.I.R. No,189 of 1997, dated 17-6-1997 under sections 302/34 and 337-A(ii)(iii)/337-F5-A(i)/148/149, P.P.C. Police Station Saddar Vehari. The case was registered initially on the statement of Abdul Waris of the petitioner party who alleged that he alongwith' petitioner, Shaiq and Mst. Kalsoom were present at their house when at about 5.30 p.m.
Mst. Muniran Bibi and her husband Muhammad Anwar let off their goats in their fodder field and when Ghulam Rasool petitioner forbade them not to do so. Anwar replied that they shall continue doing the same and that he should leave the place otherwise it would not be good for him. The conversation turned into an exchange of abuses whereafter Mst. Muniran Bibi caught hold of Ghulam Rasool and Muhammad Anwar gave a hatchet blow on his right shoulder. When Shaik and Mst. Kalsoom tried to protect Ghulam Rasool, Aslam armed with sota, Munir armed with iron bar and Muhammad Siddique empty handed came to the spot and raised Lalkara, Aslam gave a sota blow to the complainant which landed on his head. Munir gave an iron bar blow on the head of Shaik and Muhammad Anwar gave hatchet blows to complainant's mother Mst. Kasloom Bibi which hit on her head and shoulder. The complainant further added that during the occurrence they also caused injuries to Siddique, Aslam, Munir and Mst. Muniran Bibi. On the hue and cries raised, the P. Ws. Were attracted to the spot and the accused decamped.
' During the course of investigation on the statement of Muhammad Anwar accused in the afore- referred F.I.R., a counter-challan was prepared in which petitioner alongwith four others, namely, Shaik, Waris, Mst. Kalsoom Bibi and Muhammad Yousaf have been challaned for the murder of Muhammad Siddique.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for bail on the grounds that the petitioner party was the victim of attack and is complainant in this case; that the petitioner is 87 years of age; that there are only two blunt-weapon injuries on the person of Siddique deceased and he died after seventeen days of the occurrence; that all the co-accused are on bail in the police challan case as also in counter-version and that the question of petitioner's involvement would require further inquiry.
3. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, confirms that the petitioner is 87 years of age and it was a sudden flare up. He, however, was not in a position either to support or oppose the bail petition.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. The police officer appearing in Court submits that the petitioner is 87 years of age; that Muhammad Siddique died after seventeen days of the occurrence and that four persons from the petitioner side received injuries whereas three including the deceased received injuries from the other side.
6. In the afore-referred circumstances, it appears that it was a sudden fight; that the element of mens rea in so far as the petitioner is concerned is not free from doubt and that the question of petitioner's involvement in the alleged offence would call for further inquiry. He is above 87 years of age and is in judicial lock-up for the last more than one and a half year.
' In view of the above, I am inclined to admit the petitioner to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.