REHMAT ALI vs THE STATE
This is a criminal petition filed by Rehmat Ali seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 352 of 2000 registered under sections 302, 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Sitra, District Sialkot. The core legal question is whether the petitioner, who was only attributed the role of instigation (lalkara) and had been in judicial custody for a significant period with the investigation already completed, is entitled to post-arrest bail. The Lahore High Court held that since the petitioner was assigned a role of instigation while active and effective roles were attributed to absconders, and the investigation was complete with challan submitted, the case called for further inquiry. Consequently, the court accepted the bail application and admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing surety bonds. The key principle laid down is that an accused assigned a mere role of instigation, where the investigation is complete and co-accused are absconding, makes out a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- Is an accused assigned only a role of instigation entitled to post-arrest bail when the investigation is complete?
- Does attribution of a lalkara role make out a case for further inquiry under criminal jurisprudence?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code
ORDER
SHEIKH ABDUR RAZZAQ, J.-- Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. 1 No, 352 of 2000, dated 29-11-2000 under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.0 . registered at Police Station Sitra, District Sialkot.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he instigated his sons Muhammad Azeem, Ehasn Ullah and Muhammad Saleem as well as his nephews Muhammad Saleem and Muhammad Nawaz sons of Ahmad Din who were deadly armed, with respective lethal weapons to commit the murder of Muhamamd Arshad. The petitioner applied for bail which was declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Daska, vide order, dated 10-5-2001. Hence this petition. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
3. The stand of the learned counsel .for the petitioner is that only role attributed to the petitioner is of proverbial Lalkara and he was arrested on 12-12-2000 and since then he is in judicial lock-up that the investigation is complete and challan has been submitted in the Court wherein all other accused have been shown as absconders; that all these facts make the case of the petitioner open for inquiry.
4. Conversely the bail application has been opposed by the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned counsel for State and submit that the petitioner has also been attributed similar role in case F.I.R. No,78 of 2000 of same police station and that even thereafter another case vide F.I.R. No,59 of 2001, dated 29-3-2001 has been registered against the absconders regarding the murder of third brother of the complainant. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed by him.
5. Perusal of the F.I.R. reveals that active and effective role has been attributed to the absconder and the petitioner has been simply assigned the role of instigating his co-accused. The petitioner was arrested on 12-12-2000 and since then is in judicial lockup. The Investigation is complete and the challan showing the main accused as absconders has already been sent to the Court.
6. For what has been stated, above the application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, two lacs with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.