-Post-arrest bail on medical ground--Specific allegation against Petitioner is that he was armed with a pistol and fired a straight shot at injured man which hit his bladder--It is, however, observed that medical evidence does not support ocular account--

 PLJ 2021 Cr.C. 1652

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--

----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 109 & 34--Bail after arrest, grant of--Post-arrest bail on medical ground--Specific allegation against Petitioner is that he was armed with a pistol and fired a straight shot at injured man which hit his bladder--It is, however, observed that medical evidence does not support ocular account--The MLC of injured man does not show any injury on his bladder--It is trite that if there is a conflict in medical evidence and ocular account, benefit of doubt should be extended to accused even at bail stage--Since Petitioner has also sought post- arrest bail on medical ground, High Court requisitioned report from Superintendent, District Jail, Multan--According to Medical Report Petitioner has a history of acute myeloid leukemia (A.M.L) and is under treatment of Dr. Nishtar Hospital, Multan--A note from said doctor states that treatment that is being given to Petitioner causes severe immunosuppression--He has advised that he should be isolated from public and even washroom should be separated--His food should also be hygienic--Dr. has recommended isolated hygienic condition for petitioner-- In instant case, Petitioner’s medical reports clearly show that he is critically ill and needs special care which cannot be provided to him during incarceration--Bail was accepted. [P. 1654 & 1655] A, B & G

1997 SCMR 32, 2014 SCMR 12 and PLD 1995 SC 58.

Medical ground--

----Bail--Law regarding grant of post-arrest bail on medical ground has been elucidated by Hon’ble Supreme Court in a number of cases-- Hon’ble Supreme Court admitted accused to bail as he required immediate treatment, hospitalization and close monitoring by a specialist in a well equipped hospital. [P. 1654] C & D

1998 SCMR 1065, 2000 SCMR 107 & PLD 2002 SC 546 ref.

Bail on medical ground--

----It is not necessary that ailment should be of such a serious nature as may endanger life of a person but anything satisfying mind of Court that disease, he is suffering from, requires constant care, test and treatment, special diet etc--not ordinarily available in jail--Once a person was found to be sick and infirm it was not open to Court to quantify his sickness and infirmity. [P. 1655] E & F

PLJ 1988 Cr.C. (Lahore) 615 and 1979 SCMR 320.

Malik Aftab Abbas Khan, Advocate, for Petitioner.

Mr. Adnan Latif, DPG for State.

Ch. Ejaz Ahmad, Advocate, for Complainant.

Date of hearing: 4.12.2019.

 PLJ 2021 Cr.C. 1652
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Tariq Saleem Sheikh, J.
SIBTAIN alias SIPPI--Petitioner
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 6981-B of 2019, decided on 4.12.2019.

Order

Through this application petitioner Sibtain alias Sippi seeks post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 287/2019 dated 21.6.2019 registered at Police Station Qadirpur Raan, District Multan, for offences under Sections 324/109/34, PPC.

2. Briefly, the prosecution case is that on 21.6.2019 the Petitioner and his co-accused launched a murderous assault on Complainant’s son Amjad Abbas in furtherance of their common intention and injured him.

3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner contended that the Petitioner was innocent and the Complainant had falsely implicated him in this case due to ulterior motives. He was a previous non-convict and there was no chance that he would abscond. He further contended that the Petitioner was a cancer patient and critically ill. Thus, medical ground was also available to him. He prayed that this application be accepted and the Petitioner be admitted to post-arrest bail.

4. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by the learned counsel for the Complainant controverted the above contentions. He contended that the Petitioner was nominated in the FIR with a specific role. There were sufficient incriminating material available against him and he was not entitled to post-arrest bail. He prayed for dismissal of this application.

5. Arguments heard. Record perused.

Description: A6. The specific allegation against the Petitioner is that he was armed with a pistol and fired a straight shot at Amjad Abbas which hit his bladder. It is, however, observed that medical evidence does not support the ocular account. The MLC of Amjad Abbas does not show any injury on his bladder. It is trite that if there is a conflict in medical evidence and ocular account, benefit of doubt should be extended to the accused even at the bail stage. Reliance is placed on “Syed Abdul Baqi Shah v. The State” (1997 SCMR 32) and “Syed Khalid Hussain Shah v. The State and another” (2014 SCMR 12).

Description: B7. Since the Petitioner has also sought post- arrest bail on medical ground, this Court requisitioned report from the Superintendent, District Jail, Multan. According to Medical Report No. 186 dated 18.11.2019, the Petitioner has a history of acute myeloid leukemia (A.M.L) and is under treatment of Dr. Rana Attique Anwar, Nishtar Hospital, Multan. A note from the said doctor states that the treatment that is being given to the Petitioner causes severe immunosuppression. He has advised that he should be isolated from public and even washroom should be separated. His food should also be hygienic. Dr. Rana Attique Anwar has recommended isolated hygienic condition for the Petitioner.

Description: C8. The law regarding grant of post-arrest bail on medical ground has been elucidated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a number of cases. In “Muhammad Yousafullah Khan v. State” (PLD 1995 SC 58), it held:

“The correct criteria for grant of bail to an accused in a non-bailable case on medical ground, in our view, would be that the sickness or ailment with which the accused is suffering is such that it cannot be properly treated within the premises of jail and that some specialized treatment is needed and his continued detention in jail is likely to affect his capacity or is hazardous to his life.”

Description: DSimilar observations were made by the apex Court in “Zakhim Khan Masood v. State” (1998 SCMR 1065) and “Mian Manzoor Ahmad Watto v. The State” (2000 SCMR 107). In another case cited as Zulflqar Ali v. The State” (PLD 2002 SC 546), the Hon’ble Supreme Court admitted the accused to bail as he required immediate treatment,

hospitalization and close monitoring by a specialist in a well equipped hospital.

Description: FDescription: E9. The case reported as “Nawazish Ullah v. The State” (PLJ 1988 Cr. C (Lahore) 615) is also instructive. This Court held that for bail on the medical ground “it is not necessary that the ailment should be of such a serious nature as may endanger the life of a person but anything satisfying the mind of the Court that the disease, he is suffering from, requires constant care, test and treatment, special diet etc. not ordinarily available in jail. The learned Judge also relied upon “Haji Mir Aftab v. The State” (1979 SCMR 320) where it was held that once a person was found to be sick and infirm it was not open to the Court to quantify his sickness and infirmity.

Description: G10. In the instant case, the Petitioner’s medical reports clearly show that he is critically ill and needs special care which cannot be provided to him during incarceration.

11. In view of what has been discussed above, this application is accepted. The Petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 200,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

(A.A.K.) Bail accepted