NOOR ELAHI and another vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail petition filed by two brothers, Noor Elahi and Ramzan, who were accused in a case registered under Section 324/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioners had been in custody since February 1999, awaiting the commencement of their trial. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given that no specific overt act was attributed to them, and their alleged involvement was limited to the 'proverbial Lalkara' (incitement). The Court observed that the petitioners were empty-handed and that the 'proverbial Lalkara' is frequently attributed to innocent persons and often refuted by courts. Holding that there were no reasonable grounds to believe the petitioners were guilty of an offence punishable by death, life imprisonment, or ten years' imprisonment, the Court determined that the case fell within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court accepted the petition and granted bail to the petitioners subject to the furnishing of bail bonds.
- Does the attribution of a 'proverbial Lalkara' alone constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail?
- When does a criminal case qualify for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the absence of an overt act by an accused a relevant factor in granting post-arrest bail?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Noor Elahi petitioner aged about 41 years and his younger brother Ramzan petitioner aged about 28 years were arrested on the 9th of February, 1999, and are in jail ever since awaiting their trial, which has not yet commenced although the challan has been submitted in the Court, in pursuance of a case registered against them and a 3rd person, namely, Dilawar, vide First Information Report No,31 of 1999, dated 17th of January, 1999, recorded under section 324/34, P.P.C., at Police Station Misri Shah, Lahore, regarding an occurrence which took place on 17th of. January, 1999 at 2-30 p.m. On Akram Road, near Police Station Misri Shah, Lahore, where the first information report was lodged on the same day at 6-05 p.m. By Muhammad Shaukat who sustained 2 fire-arm injuries on his legs at the hands of co-accused Dilawar who was wielding a Mouser and fired twice at complainant Muhammad Shaukat.
2. No overt act whatsoever is attributed to Noor Elahi and Ramzan petitioners who were admittedly empty-handed. The only role assigned to them is what has now come to be known as the "proverbial Lalkara' because the phrase was first of all used by the then Chief Justice A.R. Cornelius in the case of Abdul Aziz v. Bashir Ahmad reported in PLD 1966 SC p.658. His Lordship was pleased to hold that the "proverbial Lalkara" is very commonly attributed to innocent persons and, therefore, refuted by the Courts with frequency. Eversince that observation and principle has been followed by the superior Courts and in this context the learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the cases of Wazir Muhammad v. The State reported in 1978 SCM R 448 and Amanat Ali v. The State reported in 1993 SCM R 1992.
3. Reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioners are guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for 10 years prima facie do not seem to exist. However, the case against the petitioners may be a matter of further enquiry within the meaning of subsection
(2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Which entitles them to the grant of bail.
4. Resultantly, this petition is accepted and the petitioners are granted bail provided they furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD YOUSAF and another vs THE STATE 2002 P Cr. L J 1645