WASEEM AHMED alias PASHA Versus THE STATE
This bail application concerns an accused, Waseem Ahmed alias Pasha, charged under Sections 302 and 324 read with Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for his alleged involvement in a shooting incident resulting in death and injury. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to post-arrest bail despite allegations of his absconsion and the severity of the charges. The Sindh High Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, noting that his case was at par with a co-accused who had already been acquitted on merits. The court observed that the FIR did not specifically attribute the fatal shot to the applicant, but rather to another co-accused. Furthermore, the court established the principle that while absconsion is a relevant factor, it is not an absolute bar to bail when the prosecution's case requires further inquiry or fails to prima facie connect the accused to the offense. Consequently, the court granted bail subject to the furnishing of a surety bond.
- Does the absconsion of an accused automatically disentitle them from the grant of bail?
- Is an accused entitled to bail if their case is at par with a co-accused who has already been acquitted?
- Can bail be granted in cases involving offenses punishable with death or life imprisonment if the prosecution case requires further inquiry?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
This bail application has been moved on behalf of accused/applicant Waseem Pasha son of Munir Ahmad who along with co-accused Muhmmad Waseem Woozi son of Muhammad Saddiq, Salim Baluch son of Muhammad Aslam and Farooque Memon son of Usman Ghani was challaned in the Court of VIlth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi (South) for offence punishable under sections 302 and 324 read with section 34, P.P.C.
The brief facts necessary for disposal of this bail application as per F.I.R. No,132 of 1996 lodged on 31-3-1996 at Police Station Eidgah on 2-45 p.m. Are that on 31-3-1996 at about 1-45 p.m. An altercation took place between the aforesaid accused persons and the complainant party consisting of Muhammad Asghar deceased Muhammad Jamil, injured, Muhammad Shakeel and Muhammad Arif on the footpath near Urdu College, Karachi. During this altercation co-accused Muhammad Waseem Woozi was said to have caused fire-arms injuries to deceased Muhammad Jamil who died. According to the F.I.R., all the four persons had fired at them and they also inflicted blows with the butt of pistols, as a result of which Muhammad Waseem received head injury while Arif received injury on the shoulder. An F.I.R. Was lodged to this effect by Muhammad Asghar and investigation was initiated by S.I., Masroor Ejaz, S.H.O. Eidgah Police Station. After completion of the investigation, he submitted the challan in the Court of the concerned Judicial Magistrate from where the accused persons were sent up for trial to the Court of Session.
Accused was arrested by the police on 8-2-1999, co-accused Muhammad Waseem Woozi has also been arrested while co-accused Salim Baluch is still absconding. Co-accused Farooq Memon who was taken into custody at the time of submission of the charge-sheet, has been acquitted on merits vide judgment, dated 24-2-1998.
I have heard the arguments of M/s. Shahadat Awan and Dilawar Hussain the learned counsel for the applicant and the State respectively and have also perused the material on record. Mr. Dilawar Hussain has opposed the bail application on the ground that the evidence in possession of the prosecution prima facie connects the accused with offences punishable with death and imprisonment for life and his case was hit by the embargo contained in section 497, Cr.P.C., and further that the applicant was absconding.
The applicant was challened along with co-accused Farooq Memon, Muhammad Waseem Woozi and Salim Baluch. Applicant Muhammad Waseem Woozi and Salim Baluch were shown as absconder. The case proceeded against co-accused Farooq Memon and by judgment, dated 24- 2-1998 passed by the VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi (South) in Session Case No,285 of 1996 he was acquitted. The case of the applicant is at par with the case of acquitted accused Farooq Memon. In the F.I.R. The complainant had assigned firing from the fire-arms to four persons namely applicant, Salim Baluch, Farooq Memon and Muhammad Wasim Woozi but the fatal shot was assigned to Muhammad Wasim Woozi, The complainant also did not specify the injuries inflicted to Arif and Shakeel to any one of the four accused persons named in the F.I.R. With regard to the ascension of the accused, it is to be noted that ground of ascension would be adversely considered in granting bail to an accused against whom prosecution has reliable and satisfactory evidence to connect him with the alleged offence. In matter where the prosecution case requires further inquiry for prima facie connecting the accused with the offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life, mere circumstance of absconsion would not be sufficient to disentitle the accused from claiming the benefit of bail.
Upon the above discussion I am satisfied that a case is made out for enlarging the applicant on bail. Accordingly, bail is granted to the applicant in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 with one solvent surety and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.