BASHIR AHMED and anothers vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Bashir Ahmed and Munir Ahmed, who were implicated in a murder case registered under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to the concession of bail given the specific allegations and their alleged role in the incident. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners accompanied the principal accused, Nazar Fareed, and assisted in bringing the deceased to the crime scene where he was shot. Conversely, the petitioners pleaded innocence, asserting that the principal accused acted alone in a sudden heat of passion. Upon reviewing the record, the Court observed that the petitioners were empty-handed and that the evidence regarding their active participation required further inquiry. Consequently, the Court held that the case against the petitioners fell within the ambit of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petition was allowed, and the petitioners were admitted to bail, establishing the principle that where the role of an accused is limited and requires further investigation, bail should be granted.
- Does the absence of weapons in the hands of the accused justify a grant of bail under the principle of further inquiry?
- When does a criminal case fall within the ambit of Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail if their specific role in the commission of the offence requires further investigation?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Bashir Ahmed and his son Munir Ahmed petitioners are involved in a case under section 302/34, P.P.C, at Police Station Saddar Pakpattan on 24-6-2002 vide F.I.R. No.252 of 2002.
2. According to the F.I.R. Iqbal Bibi, sister of Muhammad Riaz, complainant had instituted a suit for dissolution of marriage against her husband Nazar Fareed co-accused, the son of Bashir Ahmed petitioner. The judgment in the said case was to be announced on 24-6-2002. It is alleged that at about 5 a.m.
Nazar Fareed accompanied by the petitioner went to the house of the complainant. They took Muhammad Siddique father of the complainant from his house and went to Square No. 103 where Nazar Fareed accused fired with his .12 bore gun and killed Muhammad Siddique. The matter was reported to the police immediately after the occurrence. Bashir Ahmad and Munir Ahmad petitioners pleaded innocence before the police. According to them Nazar Fareed alone had gone to the house of the complainant in order to see his wife where he quarreled with the complainant and opened fire in the beat of passion hitting Muhammad Siddique.
3. I have heard the arguments and perused the record. The petitioners were empty-handed. The only allegation against them is that they collapsed the deceased before he was fired at by Nazar Fareed co- accused. Keeping in view the role of the petitioners and their plea before the police I am of the view that the case against the petitioners falls within the ambit of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. This petition is allowed. Both the petitioners are released on bail subject to furnishing bail Bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Bail granted.