INAYATULLAH vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, Inayatullah, who is facing trial for offences under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to bail given that the primary accused had been acquitted by the trial court and another co-accused had already been granted bail by the High Court. The court held that since the main accused, to whom the fatal act was attributed, had been acquitted due to the prosecution's evidence being deemed untrustworthy, the applicant's case, based on vicarious liability, warranted further inquiry. The court further held that the applicant's prior abscondence was not a sufficient ground to deny bail when the circumstances of the case, particularly the acquittal of the principal accused, mirrored those of a co-accused who had already been granted relief. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application, emphasizing that the prosecution's case required deeper scrutiny in light of the previous acquittal, and ordered the applicant's release upon furnishing the required surety.
- Does the acquittal of the main accused entitle a co-accused charged with vicarious liability to the grant of bail?
- Is the fact of abscondence alone sufficient to withhold the concession of bail when the principal accused has been acquitted?
- Does the grant of bail to a co-accused in similar circumstances justify the release of another accused on bail?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. WAHIB BUX BROHI, J.--Applicant Inayatullah is facing trial for an offence under section 302, 324, 148, 149, P.P.C. In the Court of Sessions Judge and Special Judge for Suppression of Terrorist Activities, Larkana. Learned counsel for the applicant mainly contended that two of the co-accused Ashraf and Lutuf have been acquitted by the trial Court while another accused Hassan has been granted bail by this Court. The applicant also deserves grant of bail. In the circumstances it is needless to dilate upon the facts of the case in details but suffice it to say that the allegations of prosecution are that on the day of incident 7 persons namely Azhar, Ashraf, Lutuf, Mushtaq Inayat, Imdad and Hassan attacked the complainant party and allegedly all of them fired but none was hit. It is further stated that all the accused expressed that they had dispute with Javed Shah therefore, other should keep quiet. Thereafter Ashraf and Azhar asked Javed Shah to withdraw from the fish pond else he would not be spared and on his refusal accused Ashraf (since acquitted) fired from his country made pistol at him due to which he fell down and the remaining accused persons went away issuing threats. Javed Shah was removed to hospital where he succumbed to injures. The trial initially proceeded against Ashraf and Lutuf and they were acquitted by the Special Judge, for Suppression of Terrorist Activities and Sessions Judge Larkana on 540-2002 holding that the versions of complainant and other P.Ws. Were neither trustworthy nor free from doubt and as were insufficient to prove the charge beyond shadow of doubt.
2. In the background of the above stated circumstances, it may be observed that since the main accused namely Ashraf has been acquitted of the charge, the guilt of applicant, who has been implicated on account of his vicarious liability, would, ordinarily call for further enquiry. In such circumstances, the fact of abscondence by itself would not be sufficient to withhold concession of bail, particularly, when in similar circumstances co-accused Hassan has been granted bail by this Court. Although learned Asstt. A.-G. Opposed the bail but we find no legitimate reason to reject the bail plea. Consequently the application is allowed. The applicant be released on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 and executing P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.
Cited by 5 cases
- MUHAMMAD ALI and anothers vs THE STATE 2009 MLD 1106
- WARRIS vs THE STATE 2005 P C R L J 373
- BASHIR KHAN vs THE STATE through Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P. Peshawar 2005 PLD Peshawar 98
- BASHIR KHAN vs STATE through ADVOCATE GENERAL NWFP, PESHAWAR and another PLJ 2006 Cr.C. (Peshawar) 236
- WARRIS Versus State 2005 PCRLJ 373