MUHAMMAD FAROOQ vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 69 of 2001 registered under Section 324/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, with subsequently added sections 337-A(i)(ii) and 337-F(i)(iii)(v) at Police Station Saddar, Kehror Pucca, District Lodhran. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the specific role attributed to him in the F.I.R. The Lahore High Court held that since the petitioner was empty-handed, did not cause any injuries to the injured person, and was merely alleged to have pushed the injured into a room, his case called for further inquiry under subsection (2) of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the court admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing appropriate surety bonds, establishing the principle that an accused assigned a minor role without causing direct injuries may qualify for further inquiry and bail under Section 497(2).
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when assigned a role of being empty-handed and only pushing the injured person?
- Does a case fall within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when co-accused are attributed the actual injuries?
- What is the effect on bail when the petitioner is not charged with inflicting firearm or sharp-edged weapon injuries?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' The petitioner has sought his post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,69 of 2001 registered under section 324/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Saddar, Kehror Pucca, District Lodhran on 1-4-2001.
2. After the medical report sections 337-A(i)(ii) and 337-F(i)(iii)(v), P.P.C. Were added.
3. A perusal of the F.I.R. Shows that the case was registered on the statement of Bashir Ahmad whose son Siddique Ahmad had received injuries. According to the F.1.R. Siddique Ahmad received sharp-edged as well as fire-arm injuries which were caused by Akhtar and Ghulam Mustafa, co- accused. According to the F.I.R. The petitioner had pushed the injured in a room. Another accused Irshad was also involved in the case who had been declared innocent by the police.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. The case against the petitioner was that the petitioner was empty-handed and the only role assigned to him was that he pushed the injured in a room. Admittedly the petitioner did not cause any injury to Siddique Ahmad P.W. Who received injuries at the hands of Akhtar and Ghulam Mustafa, co- accused. The allegation as against the petitioner needs further probe and inquiry within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/duty Judge. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.