HAQ NAWAZ vs MAZHAR HUSSAIN and anothers
This criminal petition was filed by the petitioner seeking the cancellation of post-arrest bail previously granted to respondent No. 1 in a case involving charges under sections 324, 334, 336, 452, 148, 149, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioner argued that the respondent and his co-accused acted brutally and were therefore undeserving of bail. The Court examined the record and noted that the respondent was originally granted bail because the injury attributed to him was on a non-vital part of the body, creating a case for further inquiry into his guilt under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Court held that once bail is granted based on the necessity for further inquiry into the guilt of an accused, such relief cannot be recalled or withdrawn without conducting that inquiry. Finding no grounds to cancel the bail, the Court dismissed the petition in limine, affirming that the initial determination regarding the need for further inquiry remained valid.
- Can bail granted on the ground of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 be cancelled without conducting that inquiry?
- Is an allegation of brutality sufficient grounds to cancel bail previously granted on the basis of further inquiry?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 334, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 336, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Haq Nawaz the petitioner through the instant petition has sought for cancellation of post-arrest bail extended to respondent No.1 by this Court on 20-5-2003 in Crl. Miscellaneous No.1094-B of 2003, titled Mazhar Hussain and others v. The State, in case F.I.R. No.8 dated 15-1-2002 under sections 324/334/336/ 452/ 148/149/109, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station, Sadar Kabirwala, District Khanewal.
2. The cancellation of his bail has been sought mainly on the ground that he and his co-accused have acted brutally in the matter and so he did not deserve the relief of bail.
3. I have carefully considered the submission and gone through the copies of record annexed to the petition.
4. Respondent No.I was allowed bail by this Court with the following observation:-- "In view of these facts, particularly, the single injury having been assigned to him to the injured lady and that too, on her non-vital part of the body, it is yet to be seen that if he can be held liable for the alleged offence and so his case is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
Requiring further inquiry into his guilt."
5. He thus was extended the relief of bail with the observation of need for further inquiry into his guilt.
6. It may be mentioned here that when an accused is allowed bail on such observation/ground, then such relief cannot be recalled/withdrawn unless such an inquiry is made. In this regard reference is made to the case of Piaro v. The State and another 1984 PCr.LJ Karachi 149.
7. Thus no case for cancellation of bail to him has been made out.
8. The petition, therefore, is dismissed in limine.