BASHIR AHMAD alias BASHIRA vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under sections 392 and 412 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, relating to an incident of dacoity where cash, a motorcycle, and other items were snatched at gunpoint by unidentified persons. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the delay in the commencement of the trial and the evidentiary value of a joint extra-judicial confession. The court held that the trial had not commenced despite a lapse of one year, and the admissibility of the joint extra-judicial confession relied upon by the prosecution would be determined by the trial court after recording evidence. Consequently, the court admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that prolonged delay in the commencement of the trial, coupled with questions regarding the evidentiary admissibility of a joint extra-judicial confession at the bail stage, can constitute sufficient grounds for the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Whether an accused is entitled to post-arrest bail when the trial has not commenced after a lapse of one year?
- Is a joint extra-judicial confession admissible in evidence against an accused for the purpose of denying bail?
- Does the statutory delay in trial constitute a ground for further inquiry under criminal jurisprudence?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 412, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Bashir Ahmed alias Bashira petitioner has sought his post-arrest bail in case F.1.R. No,80 registered at Police Station, Kot Mubarak, District Dera Ghazi Khan on 15-3-2001 for an offence under sections 392/412, P.P.C.
2. Briefly, it was stated in the F.I.R. That on 15-3-2001 at about 7-15 p.m. When the complainant was on his way to his house on a motorcycle he was stopped by two unidentified persons who were also riding on a motorcycle. The said persons had muffled their faces and were wearing black Shawls. One of the persons was armed with a kalashnikov and on the strength of the weapon the accused snatched Rs,4,000 in cash alongwith I.D. Card, Cheque-book and motorcycle of the complainant as welt. After snatching the said articles from the complainant the accused left the scene of occurrence.
3. The petitioner was arrested in this case on 11-4-2001 and at the time of arrest allegedly one kalashnikov was recovered from his possession.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record of the case. It has been noticed that despite a lapse of one year the trial has not commenced so far. The incriminating evidence against the petitioner is that of extra-judicial confession allegedly made before the complainant and one Fayyaz Hussain, P.W. A perusal of the same shows that the extrajudicial confession allegedly made by the petitioner and his co-accused was made jointly.
Whether such a confession is admissible or not in the circumstances of the case would be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of evidence. Therefore, relying on the case of ljaz Ahmad and another v. The State 1997 SCM R 1279 I admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 2 cases
- MUJAHID HUSSAIN vs THE STATE 2007 YLR 2055
- MUJAHID HUSSAIN vs STATE PLJ 2008 Cr.C. (Lahore) 313