HAQ NAWAZ vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the applicant, Haq Nawaz, seeking post-arrest bail in a criminal case registered at Police Station Shahdadkot. The applicant was charged alongside others for offences including those under the Qisas and Diyat Ordinance and the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to bail given that the specific role attributed to him was merely holding the injured person by the arm, with no overt act of violence, and considering that several co-accused had been placed in column No. 2 of the challan by the police. The Court held that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for bail. The ratio of the decision is that where an accused is alleged only to have caught hold of an injured person without performing any overt act of violence, and where the prosecution's case against other co-accused is inconsistent, the case falls within the purview of further inquiry under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the applicant.
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the only allegation is holding the injured person without performing an overt act of violence?
- Does the placement of co-accused in column No. 2 of the challan constitute grounds for granting bail to a remaining accused under the principle of further inquiry?
- Can bail be granted under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the prosecution's case against the majority of accused is uncertain?
- Section 334, Qisas and Diyat Ordinance 1979
- Section 504, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 114, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
1. ORDER FAIZ MUHAMMAD QURESHI, J. - Present applicant is seeking bail in Crime No. 142/2000 registered with Police Station Shahdadkot under Section 334, Q.D. Ordinance, 504, 147, 148, 114, PPC who has been sent up to fact trial by way of challan dated 26.1.2001.
2. Mr. Asif Ali A.R. Soomro learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention on the challan which reveals that for accused namely (1) Eid alias Eid Muhammad, (2) Azeem, (3) Ramzan and (4)
3. Luqman have been let of by police under Section 497, Cr.P.C and they have been placed in column No. 2 whereas the present applicant has been sent up to face trial alongwith main accused Khairo.
4. Mr. Soomro further submits that the role assigned to the present applicant is that he caught hold of injured Asadullah by arm and the active role is attributed to accused Khairo who is behind the bars. Mr. Asif Ali Soomro has further submitted that the prosecution is not certain with regard to the majority of the accused in view of the fact that co-accused Eid alias Eid Muhammad, Azeem, Ramzan and Luqman have been let of by police under Section 497, Cr.P.C. And have been placed in column No. 2 and only statement of Karim Dad has been recorded under Section 164, Cr.P.C. On 9.1.2001 who has implicated accused Khairo and the present applicant Haq Nawaz. Mr. Soomro has further argued that is such cases the superior Courts have granted bail even in murder cases. He has placed reliance in support of his contentions on case-law (1) 1978 SCM R 357, (2) 1995 SCM R 310 and (3) 1994 SCMR 216 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court has granted bail to the accused who is alleged to have held deceased when the principal accused caused injury to deceased. Mr. Soomro has further placed reliance 6n the law reported in 1982 SCM R 955 wherein the Honourable Supreme Court has granted bail to the accused on the ground when the prosecution is not certain with regard to the majority of the accused given in F.I.R. And who have been granted bail under Section 497, Cr.P.C. The co-accused who is attributed injury on leg of deceased has also been granted bail in the present case, the applicant is alleged to have caught hold of the injured by arm and no overt act has been attributed to the present applicant.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Memon for A.A.G. For the State has opposed the grant of bail but after taking into consideration the law reported in 1982 SCM R 955 Mr. Memon has very frankly recorded his no objection to the grant of bail, I have considered the arguments rendered by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the. Material available on record and impugned order passed by the Trial Court.
6. Admittedly, the present applicant is alleged to have caught hold of the injured Asadullah by arm and no. Overt act is attributed to the present applicant. In a case reported in PLD 1963 (West Pakistan) Karachi 118 this Court has held that "Even Devil knoweth not the hear of the man" and it cannot be said at this stage that what was in the mind of present applicant who has only caught hold of the injured by arm and thus his case is falling within the purview of Section 497 (2), Cr.P.C.
7. Particularly when the co-accused namely Eid, Azeem, Luqman and Ramzan have been placed in Column No. 2 of the challan copy. I am. Of the considered view that the present applicant has Rtima facie, made out good case for grant of bail and the law cited by the learned counsel for the applicant is applicable in the present case. Resultantly, present applicant is granted to bail in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- with P;R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court.