Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 193 views

    2020 S C M R 871

    Uploaded by

    Naveed
    1) The petitioner sought bail in a case where he was accused of theft from a cell tower and murder of his co-accused during the incident. 2) There were two versions of events - the FIR alleged indiscriminate firing by all accused while escaping, while the dying declaration and widow's statement alleged the petitioner specifically fired. 3) Given the conflicting versions, the petitioner's culpability could not be determined at this stage and was a matter for trial. 4) Mere involvement in other cases without conviction was not sufficient to deny bail. The petitioner was granted bail.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    2020 S C M R 871

    Uploaded by

    Naveed
    193 views3 pages
    1) The petitioner sought bail in a case where he was accused of theft from a cell tower and murder of his co-accused during the incident. 2) There were two versions of events - the FIR alleged indiscriminate firing by all accused while escaping, while the dying declaration and widow's statement alleged the petitioner specifically fired. 3) Given the conflicting versions, the petitioner's culpability could not be determined at this stage and was a matter for trial. 4) Mere involvement in other cases without conviction was not sufficient to deny bail. The petitioner was granted bail.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The petitioner sought bail in a case where he was accused of theft from a cell tower and murder of his co-accused during the incident. 2) There were two versions of events - the FIR alleged indiscriminate firing by all accused while escaping, while the dying declaration and widow's statement alleged the petitioner specifically fired. 3) Given the conflicting versions, the petitioner's culpability could not be determined at this stage and was a matter for trial. 4) Mere involvement in other cases without conviction was not sufficient to deny bail. The petitioner was granted bail.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    193 views3 pages

    2020 S C M R 871

    Uploaded by

    Naveed
    1) The petitioner sought bail in a case where he was accused of theft from a cell tower and murder of his co-accused during the incident. 2) There were two versions of events - the FIR alleged indiscriminate firing by all accused while escaping, while the dying declaration and widow's statement alleged the petitioner specifically fired. 3) Given the conflicting versions, the petitioner's culpability could not be determined at this stage and was a matter for trial. 4) Mere involvement in other cases without conviction was not sufficient to deny bail. The petitioner was granted bail.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    2020 S C M R 871

    [Supreme Court of Pakistan]


    Present: Sajjad Ali Shah and Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, JJ
    BABAR HUSSAIN---Petitioner
    Versus
    The STATE and another---Respondents
    Criminal Petition No. 252 of 2020, decided on 13th April, 2020.
    (Against the order of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur
    dated 22.01.2020 passed in Crl. Misc. No.3350-B of 2019)
    (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
    ----S. 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302 & 378---Bail, grant of---Further
    inquiry---Case of two versions---Accused and his co-accused persons escaped from
    the scene of occurrence while resorting to indiscriminate firing which as per
    prosecution case ultimately had hit one of the co-accused who succumbed to the
    injuries after five to seven days---In the FIR allegation of firing was ascribed to all
    the accused while escaping from the scene of occurrence, whereas, the dying
    declaration of deceased-co-accused and application moved by his wife before the
    police alleged that the firing was made by the accused---Allegation against the
    accused was of two versions, one advanced in the crime report, the other brought on
    the record in the shape of statement of deceased-co-accused as well as mentioned in
    the application filed by his widow---In such circumstances, culpability of accused
    could not be adjudicated at present stage rather it would be decided by the Trial Court
    after recording of evidence during the course of trial---Case against accused was one
    of further inquiry falling under S. 497(2), Cr.P.C. entitling him for the relief of bail---
    Accused was granted bail accordingly.
    (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
    ----S. 497---Bail---Scope---Previous criminal cases---Mere involvement of an accused
    in other criminal cases (without any conviction in any of them) could not be a ground
    to withhold the concession of bail.
    Moundar and others v. The State PLD 1990 SC 934 and Muhammad Rafique
    v. The State 1997 SCMR 412 ref.
    Qadeer Ahmad Rana, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
    Mirza Usman, DPG Punjab with Shafqat SHO, Police Station Manchanabad
    for the State.
    Date of hearing: 13th April, 2020.
    ORDER
    SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.---Petitioner Babar Hussain
    has sought leave to appeal under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic
    Republic of Pakistan, 1973 against the order of learned Lahore High Court,
    Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur dated 22.01.2020 by which the petition for post -
    arrest bail was declined in case FIR No.106/2018 dated 07.03.2018, registered with
    Police Station Manchanabad, District Bahawalnagar.
    2. As per allegations, contained in the crime report, it is alleged that the
    petitioner and his co-accused committed theft of dry batteries from Ufone Tower and
    during the occurrence, his co-accused Attaullah was murdered. The petitioner was
    saddled with responsibility of alleged crime. In response to the crime report, the
    petitioner was taken into custody by local police. He applied for post arrest bail
    before learned trial court which was declined vide order dated 12.11.2019; the same
    was assailed before learned High Court through Crl. Misc. No. 3350-B of 2019 which
    too met the same fate, hence, this petition.
    3. The crux of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is
    that there is allegation of generalized nature of resorting to indiscriminate firing
    against all the accused persons nominated in the crime report. They indulged in such
    an act when they were confronted by the security staff deployed over there after
    hearing voice of safety alarm installed there. The accused persons escaped from the
    scene of occurrence while resorting to indiscriminate firing which as per prosecution
    case ultimately had hit Attaullah who succumbed to the injuries after five to seven
    days. There is no denial to this fact that allegation of firing is ascribed to all the
    accused while escaping from the scene of occurrence. The statement of Attaullah
    deceased coupled with the application moved by widow of deceased to District Police
    Officer alleged that the firing was made by the petitioner before this Court. As far as
    the culpability of deceased as alleged in the crime report is taken into consideration,
    whereas the veracity of other story advanced by the deceased while making dying
    declaration couple with the application moved by widow of the deceased to the
    District Police Officer, it cannot be adjudicated at this juncture of time rather it would
    be decided by learned trial court after recording of evidence during the course of trial.
    4. As far as the contention of learned Law Officer that the petitioner is involved
    in six other criminal cases would not disentitle him from the relief sought for as
    learned Law Officer frankly conceded that petitioner has not been convicted in any
    case, hence, mere involvement in criminal cases could not be a ground to withhold the
    concession of bail in the given circumstances. Reliance in this regard is placed upon
    cases titled as "Moundar and others v. The State" (PLD 1990 SC 934) and
    "Muhammad Rafique v. The State" (1997 SCMR 412). As the allegation against the
    petitioner is of two versions, one advanced in the crime report, the other brought on
    the record in the shape of statement of Attaullah deceased as well as mentioned in the
    application filed by the widow of the deceased, it would squarely bring the case of the
    petitioner within the ambit of further inquiry falling under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
    entitling him for the relief sought for. Otherwise liberty of a person is a precious right
    which has been guaranteed in the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.
    Keeping in view the facts and circumstances brought on the record, we are persuaded
    to grant leave in this case. As a consequence, Criminal Petition is converted into
    appeal, same is allowed; the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to furnishing
    of bail bonds in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the
    satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Judge.
    MWA/B-9/SC Bail granted.
    ;

    You might also like