Syed ARSHAD ISRAR SHAH vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the applicant, Syed Arshad Israr Shah, in connection with Crime No. 25 of 2001, registered under sections 147, 148, 149, and 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question before the Court was whether the applicant was entitled to post-arrest bail given the existence of a counter-case (F.I.R. No. 24 of 2001) involving the same time of occurrence and injuries sustained by both parties. The Court observed that in situations involving cross-versions of an incident, it is difficult to determine at the pre-trial stage which party acted as the aggressor. Consequently, the Court held that the case fell within the scope of section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, which allows for bail when there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into the guilt of the accused. The Court granted bail to the applicant, emphasizing the principle that the existence of counter-cases, where both sides have sustained injuries, necessitates further inquiry to ascertain the true aggressor, thereby entitling the accused to the concession of bail.
- Does the existence of a counter-case involving injuries on both sides constitute grounds for further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is bail appropriate when it is unclear which party was the aggressor in a criminal incident?
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' Present application is seeking bail in Crime No,25 of 2001 under sections 147, 148, 149 and 324, P.P.C.
2. Registered with Police, Station City Court, Karachi and has been sent up to face trail alongwith co- accused Abdul Hameed Chichu, Ghulam Hussain Chandio. Mansoor Abbas, Saleemullah, Rauf, Inspector Anwar Ahmed Khan and 56 unknown persons.
3. ' Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there are counter-cases and according to him the present .F.I.R. No,25 of 2001 has been registered on 21-2-2001 whereas the F.I.R. No,24 of 2001 has also been registered on 21-2-2001 in which complainant is Jalal who is the father of co- accused Hameed Chichu. According to the learned counsel in both the F.I.Rs,? The time of occurrence is 1400 hours and in Crime No,24 of 2001 there are five injured learned counsel has contended that in view of the counter-cases, it is yet to be seen as to which party is aggressor and who has been subjected to aggression and matter calls for further inquiry.
4. ' On the other hand Mr. Sharafat Ali, Assistant Advocate-General for the State, has recorded his no objection to the grant of bail to the present applicant in view of counter-cases and he has further contended that at this stage it is difficult to assess as to which party is aggressor and case is falling within the purview of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. And has placed reliance on PLD 1985 Karachi page 27 relevant page 30 wherein the categories of further inquiry have been defined by this Court.
5. ' I have considered the arguments rendered by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record. Admittedly there are counter-cases. Injured are from both sides and it is yet to be seen as to which party is aggressor and the case of the present applicant in view of counter-cases is falling within the purview of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. And accordingly the applicant is admitted to 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.