ALLAH YAR vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the petitioners in a case registered under Sections 302, 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following an incident involving cross-fire and injuries to both the complainant and the accused parties. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given the existence of cross-versions, the nature of the injuries sustained, and the uncertainty regarding the petitioners' common intention with the co-accused who caused the fatal injuries. The Court observed that the petitioners were not alleged to have caused the fatal injuries to the deceased, and the injuries attributed to them were largely simple in nature, with only one fracture reported. Furthermore, the Court noted that injuries sustained by the accused party were not adequately explained in the initial F.I.R. The Court held that the petitioners' culpability and the question of shared common intention required further investigation. Consequently, the Court granted bail, ruling that the case fell within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Does the existence of a cross-version where both parties sustain injuries entitle the accused to further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is bail appropriate when the prosecution fails to specify which accused caused specific injuries to the complainant party?
- Can the question of shared common intention in a case involving multiple accused be determined at the bail stage?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' The petitioners have sought their post-arrest hail in case F.I.R. No,524 registered at Police Station Noor Shah, District Sahiwal on 23-9-2001 for offences under sections 302/324/148/149, P. P. C .
2. According to the F.I.R. Nine persons out of whom two were armed with rifle and a gun caused injuries on the person of Lal Khan and other P.Ws. With their respective weapon. Lal Khan succumbed to the fire-arm injuries while P.Ws. Noor Ahmad, Bashir Ahmad, Zahoor Ahmad and Muhammad received blunt weapon injuries at the hands of the petitioners and other co-accused.
It was further stated in the F.I.R. That during the occurrence Hashmat accused got injured due to firing of co-accused.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case. Hashmat Ali, Nosher Ali, and Hamid Ali accused also suffered injuries during the occurrence.
Hashmat Ali and Hamid Ali received fire-arm injuries while Nosher received injuries with a blunt- weapon. A cross-version was also recorded by the police and statedly a challan against the complainant party was also being set up for trial. Admittedly, the petitioners did not cause any injury to the deceased and the allegation against them is that they alongwith the other accused caused blunt-weapon injuries to the P.Ws. Only one injury on the person of P.W. Muhammad resulted in the fracture and that too of the little finger.. The rest of the injuries were simple in nature.
The injuries on the person of Nosher and Hamid Ali accused were not mentioned in the F.I.R.. And it was not specified as to who caused injuries out of the accused on the person of Hashmat All accused. It is a case of two versions in when both the parties' received injuries. Whether the petitioners shared the common intention with the accused who caused fire-arm injuries to the deceased would be decided by the learned trial Court after recording the evidence.
4. In these circumstances the allegation vis-a-vis the petitioners needs further probe and inquiry within the purview of subsection (2)- of section 497, Cr.P.C.. Therefore, I admit the petitioners to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) each with one surety each in the like, amount ,to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.