MUHAMMAD ZAHID vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Muhammad Zahid, who was accused in F.I.R. No. 593 of 2001 for offences under Sections 302 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was alleged to have caught hold of the deceased while a co-accused fired the fatal shots, was entitled to bail given the lack of direct injury caused by him. The Court held that since the petitioner did not cause any injury to the deceased and the post-mortem report confirmed the absence of blunt weapon injuries, the question of whether the petitioner shared a common intention with the co-accused required further probe and inquiry. Consequently, the Court allowed the petition and admitted the petitioner to bail. The key principle laid down is that where the role of an accused in a murder case is limited to catching hold of the deceased and there is an absence of physical injury caused by him, the case for common intention warrants further inquiry under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, justifying the grant of bail.
- Does the mere act of catching hold of a victim without causing physical injury constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail in a murder case involving common intention?
- When does an allegation of common intention require further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail if the post-mortem report contradicts the specific allegations of physical assault attributed to them?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Muhammad Zahid, petitioner has sought his post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No,593 of 2001 registered on 30-12-2001, for offences under sections 302/34, P.P.C., at Police Station City, Sadiqabad.
2. The precise allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith Shahid caught hold Samaar Khan, son of the complainant, while Muhammad Nawaz co-accused was beating him and within his view Muhammad Nawaz fired at Samaar Khan with his pistol, which hit on his forehead.
Muhammad Nawaz fired again and that too hit the forehead of Samaar Khan, who succumbed to the injuries at thy spot.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
4. Admittedly, the petitioner did not cause any injury to the deceased. The report of post-mortem reveals that the deceased did not receive any blunt weapon injury. Whether the petitioner shared common intention with the co-accused would be determined by the trial Court after recording of evidence. Presently, the allegation against the petitioner needs further probe and inquiry within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.