MUKHTAR MASIH vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, Mukhtar Masih, who was implicated in a criminal case registered under sections 302, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was not named in the F.I.R. and was not attributed with causing any specific injury to the deceased, was entitled to the concession of bail. The Court observed that the fatal shot was attributed to a co-accused, Rafique Masih, and the petitioner was alleged to be empty-handed at the time of the occurrence. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner's case fell within the scope of further inquiry, as the determination of vicarious liability under the charged sections was a matter to be resolved during the trial. The bail application was accepted, and the petitioner was admitted to bail subject to furnishing surety bonds. The judgment reaffirms the principle that where specific overt acts are absent and vicarious liability is the primary basis for prosecution, the case warrants further inquiry for bail purposes.
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when they are not named in the F.I.R. and are not attributed with any specific injury to the deceased?
- Does the absence of an overt act by an accused in a murder case necessitate further inquiry for the purpose of bail?
- Can the question of vicarious liability be determined at the bail stage, or is it reserved for trial?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
This application for post-arrest bail has been filed on behalf of Mukhtar Masih son of Shafi Masih, petitioner who alongwith the co-accused is involved in a case arising out of F.I.R. No,4 of 2002, registered on 12-1-2002 under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. in Police Station Ganda Singhwala, District Kasur.
2. The F.I.R. was lodged by one Muhammad Abbas relating .to the 'occurrence which had taken place at 2-30 a.m, on the night between 11/12-1-2002. In the course of occurrence one of the culprits had allegedly fired with a carbine .12 bore at Mst. Hafizan Bibi, the sister of the complainant and who had died instantaneously.
3. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
4. The present petitioner is not named specifically in the F.I.R. nor the role of tiring at the deceased is attributed to him. It`seems that as a result of the final investigation, it was found that the present petitioner was one of the accused who had allegedly killed Mst. Hafizan Bibi deceased. Anyhow, the fatal shot had been tired by Rafique Masih, a co-accused of the present petitioner. In any way, the petitioner is only stated to be one of the assailants but is not alleged to have caused any injury to the deceased or any of the P.Ws. He is also stated to be empty-handed at the time of the occurrence. As such, this case is clearly one of further inquiry into the guilt of the petitioner and he is thus entitled to the concession of bail, as the question of vicarious liability would be determined at the stage of trial. The bail application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.