GHULAM RASUL AND 3 Others vs The STATE
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order of the Lahore High Court refusing bail to the petitioners in a case involving murder and rioting. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to the concession of bail under the category of further inquiry because a number of co-accused mentioned in the first information report were found innocent by the police during investigation. The Supreme Court held that where the petitioners are specifically named in the first information report with active roles and specific weapons attributed to them, their case does not fall within the ambit of further inquiry merely due to exoneration of certain co-accused by the police. The court established that police findings of innocence regarding some accused do not automatically render the case of specifically implicated co-accused one of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and the refusal of bail by the High Court without arbitrariness or perversity warrants no interference.
- Does the exoneration of some co-accused by the police during investigation automatically make the case of remaining accused one of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Are accused persons specifically named in the first information report with assigned roles and weapons entitled to bail when the police find certain other co-accused innocent?
- Under what circumstances will the Supreme Court interfere with an order of the High Court refusing bail in a criminal matter?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order dated 17-10- 1978 of the Lahore High Court, whereby the petitioners were refused bail in a case under sections 302/149 and 148, P. P. C.
2. According to the F.1. R., the petitioners before us, armed with balams and a sota, along with others, on 21-3-1978 attacked Lal Khan deceased and caused him injuries as a result of which he died. The motive for the attack is stated to be that eight-nine months prior tot he occurrence Lal Khan deceased had made a murderous assault on one Sher Muhammad, a relative of the accused persons, and to avenge the said assault the accused have committed the murder of Lal Khan.
3. The petitioners along with Abbas co-accused applied for bail, but the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat dismissed their application. They then approached the High Court through Cr. Misc.
4. No. 3789-B of 1978 and a learned Single Judge allowed bail to Abbas co-accused but rejected the application of the present petitioners, observing that unlike Abbas they were assigned specific roles in the F. I. R.
5. Before us it is submitted that thirteen out of eighteen persons mentioned as accused in the F. I. R.
6. Were found innocent by the Police and the version given in the F. I. R. Could not be relied upon insofar as the investigation revealed that five persons not connected with the incident had allegedly participated in the occurrence while five other persons who were the true culprits had been left out. In these circumstances, the case of the petitioners was one of "further inquiry" within the meaning of section 497(2), Cr. P. C. And they are entitled to the concession of bail.
7. We are not inclined to agree. The names of the petitioners are mentioned in the F. I. R. They were allegedly armed with balams and a dang and specific parts are attributed to them. We, therefore, do no think that their case is one of further inquiry simply because during the investigation by the Police some of the accused were found innocent, The High Court, while refusing bail to the petitioners, does not appear to have exercised the discretion vested in it arbitrarily or perversely and no interference is, therefore, called for.
8. The petition is accordingly dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- PANNA N vs THE STATE 1983 PCrLJ 2374