AMEER ALI vs THE STATE
This criminal miscellaneous petition was filed by Ameer Ali seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 45 registered under section 302, 392, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Green Town, Lahore. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail considering the lack of direct evidence, inadmissible extra-judicial confession before police, and the questionable evidentiary value of a recovery. The Lahore High Court held that since the murder was unwitnessed, the police confession was inadmissible, the recovered motorcycle did not belong to the deceased, and a co-accused facing a similar case had already been granted bail, the petitioner's case called for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court consequently allowed the petition and admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail, laying down the principle that parity in treatment must be accorded to similarly placed co-accused when the prosecution evidence prima facie requires further probe.
- Is a confession made by an accused person while in police custody admissible in evidence?
- Whether an accused is entitled to post-arrest bail on the ground of parity when a co-accused in a similar position has already been granted bail?
- Does the recovery of an item not belonging to the deceased during investigation call for further probe regarding the grant of bail?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Through this petition Ameer Ali petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,45 registered at Police Station Green Town, Lahore on 25-1-2003 for an offence under section 302, P.P.C. During the investigation sections 392 and 34, P.P.C. Were added to the F.I.R.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the documents appended with this petition it has been noticed that the occurrence in this case had taken place during a night and according to the F.I.R. Itself the alleged murder had remained unwitnessed. No culprit had been nominated in the F.I.R. It is not disputed that there is no direct evidence available in this case positively incriminating the petitioner in the alleged murder and robbery and the prosecution is mainly relying upon a confession allegedly made by the petitioner before the police and a recovery of motorcycle from his custody during the investigation of this case. It goes without saying that a confession made by an accused person during his custody with the police is inadmissible in evidence. The motorcycle allegedly recovered from the petitioner's possession during the investigation did not belong to the deceased. The worth and evidentiary value of such a recovery shall be gone into by the learned trial Court at the time of the trial and the same surely calls for further probe at this stage. A co-accused of the petitioner namely Mst. Shakeela Bibi has already been admitted to post-arrest bail by this Court vide order, dated 24-11-2003 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,7048/B of 2003. It is not denied that the case against the said co- accused is not dissimilar to or distinguishable from the case against the present petitioner as far as the merits of the case are concerned. There is, thus, no reason why the petitioner may not be treated in the matter of bail in the same manner as the said co-accused. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.