ARSHAD alias BILDER vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, Arshad alias Bilder, who was implicated in a criminal case based solely on the confessional statement of a co-accused. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to bail when the prosecution's case rested exclusively on the confessional statement of a co-accused, particularly when the complainant had failed to implicate the applicant during trial testimony and no recovery was made from the applicant's possession. The Sindh High Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail, noting that the confessional statement of a co-accused is insufficient to form the basis of a conviction. The Court emphasized that it possesses the authority to take a tentative view of the evidence at the bail stage. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the applicant, finding that he had established a prima facie case for relief, given the lack of incriminating evidence and the complainant's failure to identify him as a perpetrator.
- Can the confessional statement of a co-accused alone form the basis for denying bail?
- Does the Court have the power to take a tentative view of evidence during bail proceedings?
- Is a failure by the complainant to implicate an accused during trial a valid ground for granting bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' Learned counsel for the of plicant contends that the name of the applicant does not appear in the F.I.R. And he has been challaned along with co-accused namely and respectively. Imran and Shafiq. On21-9-1997 the applicant was arrested and there was no recovery whatsoever from his possession. Thereafter he was let off under section 497, Cr. P.C. By police on 3-12- I 9971 According to the learned counsel, applicant was again arrested on 5-8-2000 on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Imran which statement is said to have been recorded on 31-12-1998.
2. According to learned counsel, the only piece of evidence against the present applicant is in shape of confessional statement of co-accused Imran which cannot form basis of conviction and she has placed reliance on 1993 PCr.LJ 1919. She has further contended that the complainant has been examined before the learned trial Court on 26-4-2001 who has not implicated any of the accused.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has finally prayed for grant of bail.
4. ' On the other hand learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed to the grant of bail in view of confessional statement of co-accused Imran which is said to have been recorded on 31-12- 1998.
5. ' I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.
6. Admittedly the only piece of evidence against the present applicant is in shape of confessional statement of the co-accused Imran which is said to have been recorded on 31-12-1998 and in that statement he has implicated the present applicant and this has not been controverted by learned counsel appearing for the State. Admittedly there is no recovery whatsoever from his possession, even no identification parade of the present applicant has been held on 3-12-1997 he was released by police under section 497, Cr.P.C. And thereafter on 5-8-2000 again he has been arrested on the basis of confessional statement. I am being fortified by the law reported in 1993 PCr.LJ 1919 wherein D,B. Of this Court has held that the confessional statement of co-accused of cannot form basis on conviction and this Min has got power to take tentative view and bail has been granted. In view of aforementioned facts, circumstances and law cited by learned counsel for the applicant, particularly when the complainant has not implicated the present applicant. I am of the considered view that at the moment applicant has been able to make out good prima facie case for grant of bail. Accordingly present applicant is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees Two Lacs Only) with P.R. Eond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court .
7. ' Criminal Bail Application No,955 of 2001 stands disposed of.