GHULAM MUHAMMAD vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a criminal case registered under sections 302, 324, 337-F(iii), 337-A(ii), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, arising from an incident where the complainant party was attacked and Abdul Razzaq succumbed to his injuries, with a specific blow ascribed to the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the medical officer's testimony at trial noted no injury on the forehead of the deceased, making his case one of further inquiry. The Lahore High Court observed that the trial had almost concluded, with most prosecution witnesses already examined, and that any evaluation of evidence at this advanced stage would prejudice the trial court's upcoming judgment. The court held that it was inappropriate to consider the bail petition at such a late stage of the proceedings. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the observation that the petitioner could renew the application if the trial was delayed beyond four months.
- Whether post-arrest bail should be granted when the trial has almost concluded and prosecution evidence stands recorded?
- Does the absence of a specific injury in medical testimony warrant bail as a case of further inquiry at the conclusion stage of a trial?
- Can a bail petition be dismissed with liberty to re-apply if the trial is delayed beyond a specified period?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 27& of 2000 dated 19-6-2000 under sections 302/324/337-F (iii)/337-A(ii)/148/149, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station, Saddar Renala Khurd, District Okara. The case was registered against a number of persons including the petitioner with the allegations that they attacked the complainant party and inflicted blows with clubs to Abdul Razzaq, Manzoor Hussain complainant and other P.Ws. Abdul Razzaq died in the occurrence. The petitioner was ascribed a specific blow to Abdul Razzaq. The bail for the petitioner has been sought for on the ground that the Medical Officer who testified at trial had not noticed any injury on the forehead of the deceased and the petitioner's case as such became that of further inquiry. The State opposed the prayer made by the petitioner.
2. The trial of criminal case against the accused including the petitioner has almost concluded and most of the prosecution witnesses stand examined. The conclusion of trial was delayed by filing a private complaint by the petitioner's side. At this stage when evidence stands recorded it would be unfair to give any finding qua guilt or innocence of the petitioner as that observation would pre- empt the judgment of the trial Court, which is to be delivered in the near future. Therefore, I am not inclined to consider the prayer made by the petitioner at this stage. In case the trial is delayed beyond four months, the petitioner can move such an application again.
3. Dismissed.