GULSHER vs The STATE
This petition for leave to appeal arose from the dismissal of a bail application by the Lahore High Court in a case involving a murder charge under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner, Gulsher, sought bail while his co-accused had already been granted bail by the High Court. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, armed with a Kassi, participated in an attack on the deceased, Abdul Majid, and a witness, Muhammad Hanif, with the petitioner specifically attributed with causing the fatal head injury to the deceased. The petitioner argued self-defence and noted that he had sustained simple injuries during the incident. The Supreme Court examined the allegations and the specific overt act attributed to the petitioner in the First Information Report. The Court held that the High Court had properly exercised its discretion in refusing bail, as the specific overt act attributed to the petitioner distinguished his case from that of his co-accused. Consequently, the Supreme Court found no grounds to interfere with the High Court's order and dismissed the petition.
- Does the attribution of a specific overt act in an FIR justify the refusal of bail in a murder case?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with the High Court's discretion in bail matters when the High Court has properly exercised such discretion?
- Is a petitioner entitled to bail solely because co-accused persons have been granted bail, despite a specific overt act being attributed to the petitioner?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. WAHEEDUDDIN AHMED, J.-The petitioner, alongwith his two brothers, are involved is F.I. R. No. 124 dated 26-4-i7 registered at P. S. Gojra under section 302/34, P. P. C. They filed Criminal Miscellaneous 110/B of 1978 for bail. The petitioner's co-accused Dilmir and Khan were granted bail by the Lahore High Court by Order dated 18-4-78. The petitioner's bail application was dismissed by the Order. The petitioner seeks permission to file an appeal against the said Order.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was armed with a Kassi. He alongwith his other co- accused attacked Abdul Majid deceased and Muhammad Hanif P. W. His brothers. Abdul Majid received three injuries caused by blunt weapon of which one on the head proved fatal. This is attributed to Gulsher.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has taken us through the F. I. R. According to him Gulsher received 8 injuries caused by blunt weapon, which were simple in nature. He contended that the petitioner Gulsher bad acted in self-defence and the occurrence took place at the tube-well of the petitioner.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, we are satisfied that an overt act is attributed to Gulsher the petitioner in the F. I. R, and the High Court has rightly refused to grant him the bail.
5. The discretion vested in the High Court has been exercised properly. We do not see any reason to, interfere with the Order of the High Court. The petition is dismissed.