MUHAMMAD YAR vs THE STATE
This matter arises out of three consolidated bail petitions filed by Muhammad Yar, Muhammad Riaz, and Rafaqat Ali in connection with a criminal case registered under sections 302, 148, 149, 316, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal questions involve whether the petitioners are entitled to post-arrest bail on the statutory ground of delayed trial under the third proviso to section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and whether bail should be granted on merits considering the roles attributed to each accused. The Lahore High Court accepted the bail petition of Muhammad Yar on the ground of consistency with co-accused who had already been granted bail. However, the court dismissed the bail petitions of Muhammad Riaz and Rafaqat Ali, holding that as police officials involved in a gruesome custodial assault and subsequent cover-up, their conduct was desperate and dangerous, thereby disentitling them to the statutory delay ground or bail on merits. The key principle laid down is that police officials whose conduct demonstrates cruelty and subversion of the criminal administration of justice forfeit the benefit of statutory delay grounds for bail.
- Whether an accused person is entitled to post-arrest bail on the statutory ground of delay under the third proviso to section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when police officials demonstrate cruel and desperate conduct dangerous to the administration of justice?
- Can bail be granted to an accused on the rule of consistency when his role is indistinguishable from that of co-accused who have already been admitted to bail?
- Are police officials involved in custodial violence and subsequent manipulation of the investigation entitled to discretionary relief of bail?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 316, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' All the three bail petitions arise out of the same F.I.R. And are, therefore, dealt with together.
2. A case under section 302/148/149, P.P.C., read with section 316/109, P.P.C., was registered against the petitioners and others at Police Station, Kirana, District Sargodha vide F.I.R. No, 148, dated 26-5- 1997 lodged by Amir Complainant.
3. The detailed facts of the case have been given in my order, dated 13-5-1998 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,1822-B of 1998 titled Muhammad Yar v. The State.
4. Is contended that Muhammad Riaz and Rafaqat Ali were arrested on 18-7-1997 and 12-6-1997 respectively and as such they are behind the bars continuously for more than two years, but the trial of the case has not yet opened. As such it is argued that the case of the aforesaid petitioners fall within the 3rd proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. And they are entitled to bails on statutory ground.
On merits also it is contended that they are involved for an offence under section 316, P.P.C., read with section 109, P.P.C., as the challan has been submitted under the aforesaid sections and not under section 302, P.P.C. In respect of Muhammad Yar, it is contended that no positive role is attributed to him in the F.I.R., as he was empty handed and had only raised Lalkara. In this respect, it is submitted that his case is not distinguishable from Muhammad Yar son of Lal, Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Mumtaz, who have been admitted to bails vide order, dated 13-5-1998 recorded in Criminal Miscellaneous No,1822-B of 1998. In addition to that petitioner Muhammad Yar is continuously behind the bars since after his arrest on 13,6-1997.
5. The bail applications were opposed by the learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant on the ground that on a private complaint filed by the complainant all the accused have been summoned under section 302, P.P.C., and that the case has been sent for trial to the Court of Session alongwith challan case.
6. I have considered the foregoing submissions and find that role of Muhammad Yar son of Salehon cannot be distinguished from Muhammad Yar son of Lal, Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Mumtaz, who have been admitted to bails as aforesaid. The petition to his extent (Muhammad Yar son of Salehon) is, therefore, accepted and he is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
7. So far as Muhammad Riaz and Rafaqt Ali are concerned, their case is distinguishable as they are police employ 'es, former being Head Constable and the latter being an A.S.I. The motive is clearly against Muhammad Riaz Head Constable who along with aforesaid A.S.I. Had given gruesome beating to the deceased Muhammad Hayat with 'Dandas', Chittar' and Kicks. Due to aforesaid beating the condition of the deceased badly deteriorated whereupon Rafaqat Ali alongwith other police employees removed him to the office of C.I.A. (HQ) at Sargodha. The deceased was put in the judicial lock-up in semi-conscious condition and was given 2/3 injections by Rafaqat Ali, who also put some material in his mouth thereby causing his death. Both the petitioners had taken law into their own hands and had perished the human life instead of protecting it as is required of them under the law.
8. It appears that investigation in this case has also not been conducted diligently as all the Investigating Officers being police officials had been persistently holding out both the petitioners innocent and deliberately tried to take their case out of the ambit of section 302, P.P.C., by substituting the aforesaid offences with section 316, P.P.C. However, the conduct of both the petitioners being police officials is very cruel, desperate and dangerous to the criminal administration of justice. As such they are not entitled to the provisions contained in 3rd proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C., nor their case is fit for bail on merits as admittedly they have been summoned in a complaint instituted by the complainant under sections 302, 109, 148 and 149, P.P.C. Accordingly the bail petition of Muhammad Riaz and that of Rafaqat Ali are dismissed.