MUHAMMAD AMEER vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a second post-arrest bail petition filed before the Lahore High Court by the petitioner, Muhammad Ameer, seeking bail in a criminal case after his first bail application was dismissed on merits. The core legal question concerns whether a second bail petition is maintainable in the absence of any fresh grounds, particularly when the trial has commenced and is actively proceeding before the competent court. The Court held that no fresh ground for bail was made out, noting that the petitioner's counsel had made a misstatement regarding unreported judgments relied upon for parity. The Court emphasized that since the trial is actively proceeding and fixed for hearing, interference at this stage is unwarranted. Consequently, the bail petition was dismissed.
- Is a second post-arrest bail petition maintainable without any fresh grounds?
- Does the commencement and active progress of a trial preclude the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Can bail be granted on the basis of parity when the facts of the cited precedent are distinguishable?
ORDER
' This is second bail petition on behalf of the petitioner. His earlier Cr1. Misc. No.6055 -B of 2003 was dismissed by this Court on 13-11-2003 in which the following order was passed that "the trial having started and statement of one witness of abetment having been recorded, no case for bail is made out, dismissed."
2. At the time of issuing notice in the instant petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before me that earlier application was dismissed because a statement was made before this Court by Mian Muhammad Nawaz, Advocate for the complainant that statement of witness of abetment had already been recorded, so notice was issued and in the meanwhile, I also called a report from the learned Sessions Judge, Bhakkar, whether any Presiding Officer is working or not where the trial of instant case is pending. Report from learned Sessions Judge has been received.
According to the said report, presently, Mr. Khalid Rashid, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhakkar has assumed the charge and the Court is in function.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the bare perusal of the statement of P.W.6 the witness of abetment no case is made out against the petitioner. He has only stated that he will follow up the case if Gul Muhammad is murdered. He relied upon PLD 1998 SC 241; 2002 M LD 712 and PLD 1999 SC 581 and also on two unreported judgments. When he was referring the said two unreported judgments he submits that this Court had already granted bail to him in which 10 witnesses were already examined. I have gone through the said unreported judgments, there is no mention as has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner. A misstatement has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner before me because in that case petitioner was a woman and the bail was granted that petitioner was accused of abetment and there was a delay of 12 days in lodging the F.I.R. In the instant case, position is the same, there is no fresh ground, so without going into the merits of the case, as the trial is proceeding B on and fixed for 14, 15 and 16 of this month, no ground, , for bail is made out, therefore, this petition is dismissed.