HAMAYUN vs THE STATE
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from a murder case where the petitioner was named in the First Information Report. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail despite the offence falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, given that he had been declared innocent in three successive police investigations and placed in column No. 2 of the report under Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court held that the petitioner's case constituted one of further inquiry under Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The ratio established is that where the investigating officer concludes, based on witness statements, that the accused did not participate in the crime, and where no recovery was effected from the accused, the court may grant bail. The key principle laid down is that findings of innocence in successive police investigations, coupled with the absence of incriminating recoveries, provide sufficient grounds to treat a case as one of further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail even in capital offences.
- Does a police report declaring an accused innocent in successive investigations constitute a ground for further inquiry under Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be granted in a murder case falling under the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, if the accused was placed in column No. 2 of the report under Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Twelve accused Were named in the F.I.R. Which Was lodged by Zulfiqar for the murder of his brother Mustafa. The occurrence in the instant case had taken place at 8-00 a,m. While the matter was reported 'at 8-35 a.m. According to Police investigation, three accused are absconders while five are in jail and two namely Imran and Sahib Dad are on bail.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that murder case is already pending between the parties because one of the near relation of the petitioner's party was murdered by the present complainant party. Further submits that petitioner has been found innocent during three successive investigation and his name has been-placed in column No,2 of the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. Adds that no recovery was affected from the petitioner. Learned counsel has placed reliance on 1970 SCM R 299 and NLR (sic) Cr.C.704 to Submit that case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) to section 497, Cr.P.C.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that occurrence having taken place in broad daylight the matter was reported to the Police promptly with specific allegation against the petitioner and his co-accused. Further submits that mere non-recovery of weapon of offence and opinion of the Police declaring the petitioner as innocent is no ground to allow bail to the petitioner when the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
4. Muhammad Bashir S.I. Who claims to be Investigating Officer submits that according to' statements of the witnesses recorded during the course of investigation, only two persons, namely, Kashif and Zubair took part in the murder of Mustafa. Learned counsel for the State submits that if this is the position as submitted by the Investigating Officer, then it is a case of further inquiry.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the Police file. The petitioner has been found innocent in three successive investigations and his name has been placed in column. No,2 of the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. No recovery was affected from him. According to Police investigation the petitioner was present at his house at about 745 a.m. Or so. To this effect, the Investigating Officer has recorded the statement of the witnesses. In my view, prima facie case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) to section 497, Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this petition is accepted and the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs,50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.