ILLAHI BUX vs THE STATE
This bail application was filed by the applicant/accused who was facing trial under Sections 324, 353, 409, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following an alleged police encounter. The prosecution alleged that the applicant, armed with a Kalashnikov, fired upon a police party, leading to a ten-minute exchange of fire, after which he was apprehended and the weapon recovered. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to post-arrest bail under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Sindh High Court observed that despite the alleged armed encounter, not a single scratch was caused to either party. Furthermore, the applicant had been in jail since September 30, 2000, the investigation was complete, and the alleged offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The Court held that the case required further inquiry under Section 497(2), Cr.P.C., and consequently granted bail to the applicant.
- Whether an alleged police encounter resulting in no injuries or scratches to either party justifies the grant of bail on the ground of further inquiry?
- Can post-arrest bail be granted under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the accused is no longer required for investigation and the offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 550, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD ROSHAN ESSANI, J.--- The facts leading to present application for bail are that applicant/accused Illahi Bux by caste Jatoi is facing trial under sections 324, 353, 409 and 34, P.P.C.
2. Before the learned Special Judge (S.T.A.), Sukkur. It arose out of F.I.R. No,25 of 2000 of Police Station Bagerji.
3. ' The brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed in the F.I.R. Dated 30-9-2000 lodged by S.I.P./S.H.O. Abdul Hameed Panhwar at Police Station, Bagerji are that he alongwith his subordinate staff went for patrolling vide Roznamcha entry No,11, 1420 hours dated 30-9-2000. When they reached at Goserji bus stop, the S.H.O. Received spy information that two bandits alongwith motorcycle were standing on Kando Wahan Link Road near village for committing an offence. The police party reached at pointed place and saw that two persons armed with kalashnikov and Lathi were standing there. On challenge by police, the person armed with kalashnikov opened fire on police. The police also returned fire. This cross-fire continued for about 10 minutes. Thereafter, the culprits were apprehended and weapons were recovered from their possession. The person from whom kalashnikov was recovered disclosed his name as Illahi Bux. On opening the kalashnikov, it was found that two bullets were obstructed in barrel whereas 10 bullets were lying in its magazine.
4. Another person from whom Lathi was recovered introduced himself as Sher Muhammad Jatoi. The accused had no licence for the weapon and the ownership documents of motorcycle. It was, therefore, recovered under section 550, Cr.P.C.
5. ' The accused and recovered property were taken to police station and F. I.R. Was registered against them.
6. ' The applicant/accused applied for bail before the trial Court but it was declined by impugned order, dated 30-11-2000.
7. ' We have heard Mr. S. Mushtaq Hussain Shah, learned counsel for the applicant/accused and Mr. Sher Muhammad Shar, learned Assistant Advocate-General, Sindh on behalf of the State. The latter opposes the bail plea of the applicant/accused.
8. The perusal of material placed on record shows that the applicant/accused is no more required for the purpose of investigation. There is allegation of encounter between the complainant party and accused but not a single scratch was caused to either party. The accused is in jail since 30-9-2000 but case is not completed so far. The offence alleged is not punishable with death, imprisonment for life or 10 years.
9. ' Looking towards the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the case necessitates further enquiry as contemplated under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. And applicant/accused is entitled to bail.
10. ' Consequently, the applicant/accused is granted bail in the sum of Rs,two lacs and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
11. ' Bail application stands disposed of.
Cited by 2 cases
- FIDA HUSSAIN alias MIR JATT vs THE STATE 2009 P Cr. L J 1048
- AKBAR vs THE STATE 2010 MLD 293