2018 PLP 201 (YLRN)
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF alias BAO — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2018 PLP 201 (YLRN) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Abdul Sami Khan, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHRAF alias BAO — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP 201 (YLRN)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2018 PLP 201 (YLRN)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Sami Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2018 PLP 201 (YLRN) (MUHAMMAD ASHRAF alias BAO — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Kanwal Rehman Bukhari for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(2)(4)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 34
Qatl-i-amd and common intention
Effect
Scope
Injury attributed to the accused was only a grazing wound which was admittedly not the cause of death of the deceased
Record revealed that fatal injuries were attributed to co-accused persons, therefore, culpability of the accused for causing death of deceased along with co-accused persons would be determined by Trial Court after recording evidence
Accused was non-convict and was behind the bars while period of four and half years had elapsed but his trial had not been concluded as yet, so he could not be kept in jail for indefinite period
Mere heinousness of offence or commencement of trial was no ground to refuse bail which could be granted at any stage if otherwise the accused became entitled to the concession of bail under subsection (4) of S.497, Cr.P.C.
Case of the accused was that of further inquiry as envisaged under subsection (2) of 497, Cr.P.C.
Accused was admitted to bail, in the circumstances. [Para. 2 & 3 of the judgment] Irfan Zia, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State and Hussain S.I. with record.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.
Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.761/12 dated 23.09.2012 under sections 302, 34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Hujra Shah Muqeem, District Okara.
2. The arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties have been heard and record of this case has been perused with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreciation is not allowed at this stage. It has been noticed by this Court that although the petitioner is named in FIR, yet the fact remains that the injury attributed to the petitioner therein is only grazing wound which is admittedly not the cause of death in this case and the fatal injuries are attributed to co-accused Safdar Nazir, Saleem and Munir, therefore, culpability of the petitioner for causing death of Naveed Zain-ul-Abideen deceased along with co-accused who have been attributed fatal injuries, shall be determined by learned trial court after recording evidence. Admittedly the petitioner is previous non-convict. He is behind the bars since 05.09.2013. A period of four and a half years has lapsed but his trial has not been concluded as yet. It is settled law that nobody can be kept in jail for indefinite period as speedy trial is the right of the accused. Investigation to the extent of petitioner is complete and he is no more required for further investigation. Mere heinousness of offence or commencement of trial is no ground to refuse bail and bail can be granted at any stage of trial if otherwise the accused becomes entitled to the concession of bail as under subsection (4) of section 497, Cr.P.C. "bail can be granted to accused after conclusion of trial before the pronouncement of judgment". It goes without saying here that an ultimate conviction and incarceration of a guilty person can be repaired by the wrong caused by a mistaken relief of bail granted to him but no satisfactory reprisal can be offered to an innocent person for his unjustified incarceration at any stage of case if he is acquitted in the long run.
3. For what has been discussed above, case of petitioner becomes one of further inquiry covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and petitioner is granted bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.200,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only. MQ/M-59/L Bail granted.