QASSIM vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail application filed by an accused facing trial under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 in connection with an FIR registered at Police Station Jackson, Karachi. The core legal question concerns whether bail should be granted to an accused who is merely alleged to have caught hold of the deceased while a co-accused inflicted the fatal stab wound. The Sindh High Court held that since the applicant was only alleged to have caught hold of the deceased with no fatal overt act attributed to him, and his common intention remained a matter for determination at trial, the case fell within the scope of further inquiry. Consequently, the court granted post-arrest bail to the applicant. The key principle laid down is that an accused assigned the role of holding the deceased, without causing a fatal injury, is ordinarily entitled to bail pending trial when further inquiry into their intent is warranted.
- Is an accused who is merely alleged to have caught hold of the deceased entitled to post-arrest bail when the fatal blow is attributed to a co-accused?
- Does catching hold of a deceased person without committing a fatal overt act warrant further inquiry under criminal jurisprudence?
- Whether bail can be granted when the common intention of an accused is yet to be determined at trial?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' Present applicant is facing trial under section 302/34, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station Jackson, Karachi. He has been sent up to face trial alongwith co-accused namely and respectively Anwar and Yousuf.
2. ' Brief facts of the case are that on 8-5-1999 Muhammad Amin son of Amir lodged F.I.R. Stating therein that he is residing at the address given in the F.I.R. Having a shop at Jackson Bazar, adjacent to his house where his cousins Anwar Hussain and Abdul Hussain are residing. Anwar hussian is working with him at the shop but on the day of incident he alongwith labourer were filling other plot which is on short distance from his house. At about 3-15 p.m. a person namely Arif knocked his door and told him that Yousuf and his brothers are quarrelling with Anwar Hassan on which he and Arif went there and saw that Yousaf, Qassim and Anwar were beating his cousin and Bakhtiar is disengaging them. His cousin ran after getting freed himself from them. Yousaf and Qasim caught hold of deceased Anwar Hassan and Anwar co-accused stabbed him with Churri which hit his chest and he fell down. Yousuf and his brothers fled away towards the street of Katchi Parra, and then he saw that his cousin was injured and was removed to police station. Thereafter he lodged the report.
3. ' Mr. Mehmood A. Qureshi, Advocate for the applicant, has contended that the allegations against the present applicant Qasim is that he caught hold of deceased whereas co-accused Anwar stabbed with Churri on chest of the deceased and who later on succumbed to injuries. According to him the fatal injury is attributed to co-accused Anwar and the present applicant only caught hold of the deceased. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on 1995 SCM R 310, 1994 SCM R 393, 1978 SCM R 357.
4. ' On the other hand Mr. Sharafat Ali, A.A.-G. For the State, has opposed to the grant of bail on the ground that the present applicant caught hold of deceased and thereafter the deceased sustained Churri blows at the hands of co-accused Anwar.
5. ' I have considered the arguments rendered by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record. Admittedly, the present applicant has caught hold of deceased and no overt act has been committed by him. What was the intention of the present applicant is yet to be determined at the trial. I am being fortified by the authorities cited by the learned counsel for the applicant wherein the Honourable Supreme Court has granted bail to the accused who was alleged to have caught hold of deceased before he was given injuries by co- accused. In the present case fatal blows have been caused by co-accused Anwar and not by the present applicant. In result the present applicant is granted bail in the sum of Rs,100,000 (Rupees One Lac Only) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Cited by 3 cases
- ABDUL QUDOOS Versus State 2023 PCrLJN 15
- MUNIR AHMAD alias FAZALULLAH vs THE STATE 2008 YLR 1544
- SARWAR KHAN vs THE STATE 2002 YLR 64