ALI MUHAMMAD vs THE STATE
This matter arose from a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, who sought concession of bail on the grounds of receiving injuries during the incident and advancing a counter-version. The core legal questions before the Lahore High Court were whether a case involving counter-versions and determination of the aggressor warrants further inquiry, and whether bail should be granted when the alleged offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and the accused is no longer required for investigation. The Court held that determining which party was the aggressor and assessing the correctness of the petitioner's counter-version required further inquiry. Noting that the offence was not hit by the prohibitory clause and the petitioner was in judicial custody, the High Court admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bonds, while granting liberty to the trial court to cancel bail if the concession was misused or trial hampered.
- Whether the existence of a counter-version and determination of the aggressor party makes a case one of further inquiry for the grant of bail?
- Whether post-arrest bail may be granted when the alleged offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause and the accused is no longer required for investigation?
- Whether the trial court retains the liberty to cancel bail if the accused misuses the concession or hampers the trial?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Seeks bail on the ground that the petitioner and his companions have also received injuries. They came up with the counter-version which is still to be verified. Further submits that the offence alleged against the petitioner is not hit by the prohibitory clause. The question whether, which of the parties is aggressor and whether' the petitioner's counter-version is correct is open to further inquiry. The petitioner is in the judicial lock-up and as such is not required for further investigation.
He is, therefore, admitted to bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
2. In case the petitioner misuses the concession be hampers the trial, in any manner, the learned trial Court will be at liberty to withdraw the bail.
Bail not allowed.