MUHAMMAD IRSHAD vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 337/F-I, 337/F-iv, 337/L2/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Fareed Town, Sahiwal. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail considering the facts of the case, the nature of the injuries, the debatable motive, and the applicability of the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition and held that the offense alleged did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the motive alleged by the prosecution was vague and repellent to common sense, and the petitioner had already been incarcerated for several months without requiring further investigation. The key principle laid down is that bail should be granted as a rule in offenses not falling within the prohibitory clause, particularly where further inquiry into the guilt of the accused is warranted and the petitioner's continued detention serves no useful purpose.
- Whether an offense not falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 entitles the accused to post-arrest bail as a matter of rule?
- Does a vague and uncorroborated motive alleged in the first information report warrant further inquiry into the guilt of the accused under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the prolonged incarceration of an accused person whose continued custody is not required for investigation a valid ground for the grant of bail?
- Section 337/F-I, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337/F-iv, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337/L2/34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No,272 of 2001 dated 6-9-2001, under sections 337/F-I, 337/F-iv, 337/L2/34, P.P.C. Police Station Fareed Town, Sahiwal, registered on the statement of Ali Sher, wnerein it is alleged that on the fateful day complainant and his brother had gone to Chak Azam Sahoo in connection with some bereavement that on the' way back they went to the house of Ahmad Yar and when till morning he did not return the complainant r went there to find out his whereabouts and saw that Muhammad Irshad petitioner son of Ahmad Yar armed with hatchet, Muhammad Aslam armed with .12 bore Gun, Mst. Kaki armed with `Sotta' were 'belaboured his brother Khuda Bakhsh. Muhammad Aslam had allegedly held out a Gun at him whereas Muhammad Irshad petitioner and his mother Mst. Kaki were giving him blows with their respective weapons. It is alleged that Muhammad Irshad petitioner gave hatchet blows on the right hand and left leg and Mst. Kaki's Sotta blow landed on the left eye of Khuda Bakhsh. Khuda Bakhsh fell down and when the complainant tried to intervene, he was threatened by Muhammad Aslam that he would be killed.. In the meanwhile, the other P.Ws. Came to the spot the accused decamped. The motive alleged is that there is a murder case in which accused is helping the opposite party and on that grudge the attack was launched.
2. I have examined the case with the assistance of learned counsel for the 'State. Learned counsel for the State submits that as per the record the case of the petitioner was that Khuda Bakhsh wanted to commit rape with his mother Mst. Kaki on account of which he was apprehended and they have lodged a false report. According to him Mst. Kaki vas declared innocent. He, however, opposes the petition on the ground that petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R. And a definite role is assigned to him and that there is no reason why petitioner should be falsely implicated.
3. Heard.
4. Admittedly, during investigation Mst. Kaki's statement was recorded in which her stand was that she was attempted to be trapped by Khuda Bakhsh and her son Muhammad Irshad petitioner had given him beating on account of `Ghairat' . The motive alleged by the prosecution in the F.I.R. Is rather vague and it is repellant to common sense that accused would attack Khuda Bakhsh merely because the complainant party was helping a rival party in a murder case. There is no reference of the particulars of the said murder case in the F.I.R. Either. The offence alleged does not fall in the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Petitioner is in jail for the last more than 4/5 months and is no more required for further investigation. Resultantly, this petition is allowed subject to petitioner's furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate Section 30. He shall be released on bail.