2016 PLP 179 (YLRN)

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302, 148, 149 & 109

Qatl-i-amd, rioting, unlawful assembly and abetment

Accused was nominated in the FIR and allegations levelled by prosecution against him in FIR were only to the extent of making ineffective firing at the spot which landed on a wall and no injury whatsoever to the deceased or anybody else was attributed to him therein

Specific role of making fire to deceased had been attributed to accused in supplementary statement, yet the fact remained that during investigation of case, Investigating Officer had concluded that accused was not present at the scene of crime at relevant time and in consequence thereof a discharge report had been prepared to the extent of accused

Validity

Opinion of police was not binding upon courts of law yet the same could be considered at bail stage if based upon sound reasons

Nothing had been recovered from accused during investigation and motive was also not attributed to accused

Perusal of FIR showed that civil litigation between parties was admitted by complainant so possibility of false implication of accused could not be ruled out

Accused was not a previous convict, and was never involved in any criminal case, and since he had been arrested in connection with present case, he had been behind the bars

Investigation qua accused was complete, physical custody of accused was not required by police, therefore, his continuous incarceration in jail would not serve any beneficial purpose at present stage

Case against accused called for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of S. 497(2), Cr.P.C., therefore, bail was allowed and accused was admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds. [Paras. 2 and 3 of the judgment] 2012 SCMR 1137 rel. Irfan Zia, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State with Asghar Ali, ASI with record. Nemo for the Complainant. ORDER ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.

Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. Ansar Javed petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No. 273/15, dated 13.04.2015 registered at Police Station City, District Hafizabad in respect of offences under sections 302/148/149/ 109, P.P.C.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed by this Court that this is bail after arrest and only tentative assessment is required at this stage. Although the petitioner is nominated in the FIR yet the fact remains that the allegation leveled by the prosecution against him in the FIR is only to the extent of making ineffective fire at the spot which landed on a wall and no injury whatsoever to the deceased or anybody else is attributed to him therein. Although in supplementary statement specific role of making fire to the deceased has been attributed to the petitioner yet the fact remains that during the investigation of this case the investigating officer has concluded that the petitioner was not present at the scene of crime at relevant time and in consequence thereof a discharge report has been prepared to the extent of the petitioner but the same has been disagreed by the learned Area Magistrate. In such like situation this case to the extent of the petitioner becomes a case of two versions one put forth by the complainant in the FIR and the second came on record during investigation and which version is correct should be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. Reliance can easily be placed on the case reported as 2012 SCMR 1137. Although opinion of police is not binding upon the courts of law yet the same can be considered at bail stage if based upon sound reasons. Nothing has been recovered from the petitioner during the investigation of this case. The motive is also not attributed to the petitioner. A bare perusal of the FIR shows that civil litigation between the parties is admitted by the complainant so in the backdrop of above mentioned circumstances possibility of false implication of the petitioner in this case cannot be ruled out of consideration. The petitioner is previous non e convict, never involved in any criminal case, he has been arrested in connection with this case on 03.06.2015 and since then he is behind the bars, investigation qua him is complete, physical custody of the petitioner is not required by the police, therefore, his continuous incarceration in jail would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.

3. For what has been discussed above, the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subjected to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

4. Before parting with his order it is, however, clarified that the observation made hereinabove are just tentative in nature and they are strictly confined to the disposal of instant bail petition. The learned trial court shall proceed with the matter on the merits of the case. RR/A-113/L Bail granted.