MUHAMMAD BABAR vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 302, 148, 149, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following an FIR alleging his involvement in the murder of the complainant's son. The prosecution case alleged that the petitioner, along with co-accused, ambushed the deceased and fired shots, with the petitioner specifically attributed a pioneering role in causing fatal firearm injuries. The petitioner argued that no independent witnesses were cited and raised the issue of minority. The Court held that the absence of independent witnesses requires a deeper appraisement of evidence at trial, which cannot be conducted at the bail stage. Furthermore, the Court found that the specific attribution of fatal firearm injuries, supported by medical evidence revealing 16 firearm wounds, combined with a clear motive reported promptly in the FIR, provided sufficient grounds to believe the petitioner's involvement. Consequently, the Court ruled that the offence fell within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, disentitling the petitioner to bail.
- Does the absence of independent witnesses in an FIR warrant the grant of bail?
- Can a plea of minority be effectively adjudicated at the bail stage when specific fatal injuries are attributed to the accused?
- Does an offence involving specific attribution of fatal firearm injuries supported by medical evidence fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER FALAK SHER, J.- Petitioner having been arrested in the case registered vide FIR No. 205 of 5.4.1999 under Sections 302, 148, 149, 109, PPC Police Station, Noshehra Virkan, District Gujranwala alleging that the complainant accompanied by his son Nasarullah amongst others enroute to his place of abode after being through with the Asar Prayers in the local mosque were ambushed by the petitioner conjunctively with Falak Sher, Muhammad Arshad (guns) and Zahid alias Babu (rifle); responding to Arshad's exhortation to exterminate the complainant's son Nasarullah deceased, the petitioner playing the pioneering role alongwith Falak Sher fired gun shots landing at the deceased's right flank below the armpit to whom their accomplices also subjected to fires to which he succumbed on the spot, having conspired .With Liaqal Ali and Muhammad Yousaf with a view to avenging the quarrel ensued between the deceased and the petitioner, etc. Has sought bail.
2. Contending that no independent witness from the locality has been cited and minority.
3. To which I am not favourably disposed because the former plea warrants deeper appraisement of evidence to be adduced at the trial with a right to the petitioner to expose their veracity through cross-examination while no premium could be reaped on the latter count at this juncture for keeping in view the pointing role with the specific attribution of fatal fire-arm injury duly borne out by the medical evidence revealing 16 fire arm wounds including 14 inlets of different apparatus; against who a motive has also been spelt out promptly reported at the Police Station ex facie constitutes sufficient grounds for believing his involvement v the offence charged falling within the prohibition contemplated by Section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Renders him disentitled to be sought for concession; resultantly the same fails and is hereby dismissed.