PLJ 2024 Cr.C. (Note) 167
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, J.
MUHAMMAD MAQSOOD AHMAD--Petitioner
versus
STATE, etc.--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 10070-B of 2023, decided on 18.3.2024.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/34/109--Abetment--No overt act--Facilitating the principal accused--Supplementary statement--Pre-Arrest Bail--Confirmation of--The name of the petitioner does not transpire in the FIR and it only came about in the supplementary statement--Section 107 PPC reveals that three ingredients are essential to dub any person as conspirator i.e. (i) instigation, (ii) engagement with co-accused and (iii) intentional aid qua the act or omission for the purpose of completion of abetment--All the three ingredients of Section 107 PPC are prima facie missing in this case--Except the supplementary statement of complainant there is no evidence collected by the Investigating Agency--The alleged guilt of the petitioner would be determined by the trial Court--Petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner by High Court is confirmed. [Para 4 & 5] A, C, D, E, F & G
2000 YLR 1314 ref.
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)--
----S. 107--Section 107 PPC reveals that three ingredients are essential to dub any person as conspirator i.e.--
(i) instigation,
(ii) engagement with co-accused, and
(iii) intentional aid qua the act or omission for the purpose of completion of abetment-- [Para 4] B
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497--Belated supplementary statement--A belated supplementary statement has no value in the eyes of law. [Para 4] D
2011 SCMR 161 ref.
Khawaja Qaisar Butt, Advocate and Mr. Abdul Rehman Zouq Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Hassan Mahmood Khan Tareen, Deputy Prosecutor General for State.
Mian Ahmad Mahmood Advocate for the Complainant.
Date of hearing: 18.3.2024.
Order
Petitioner being accused in case FIR No. 294 dated 13.9.2023 recorded under Sections 302, 34, 109 PPC registered at Police Station Jandanwala District Bhakkar has sought pre-arrest bail on the grounds that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case with mala fide intention and ulterior motive.
2. As per contents of FIR, the complainant alleges that on 13.09.2023, at about 06:30 a.m., the accused Intezar @ Kala and Nadeem came on motorbike at the diesel agency of his son Aamir Sohail while the petitioner alongwith Muhammad Qaiser/Qaiser Maqsood (co-accused) also emerged on motorbike who were duly armed with pistols and they stayed at Noora Chowk. Accused Nadeem fired pistol shot which landed at the flank of Aamir Sohail. Co-accused Intezar made pistol shot which hit on his left arm. Co-accused Nadeem made subsequent fireshot which landed at his chest. When he attempted to escape, co-accused Intezar again made fire shot on the backside of his head. He fell down as a result of receiving fire shots. Thereafter, both the accused persons made indiscriminate firing hitting on different parts of his body which resulted death of Amir Sohail. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq and Tanveer Javed. Motive behind the occurrence is that there was inheritance dispute between the parties. Hence this! FIR.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. I have given due-consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record available before this Court. Admittedly, the name of the petitioner does not transpire in the FIR and it only came about in the supplementary statement of the complainant which was got recorded on 13.09.2023 whereby the allegation against the petitioner is that Aamir Sohail (deceased) was done to death on the abetment of present petitioner and co-accused Waheed Akhtar. Section 107 PPC reveals that three ingredients are essential to dub any person as conspirator i.e. (i) instigation, (ii) engagement with co-accused and (iii) intentional aid qua the act or omission for the purpose of completion of abatement. All the three ingredients of Section 107 PPC are prima facie missing in this case. Moreover, it is settled law that a belated supplementary statement has no value in the eyes of law, as established by the case law reported as “Abid Ali alias Ali v. The State” (2011 SCMR 161). Except the supplementary statement of complainant there is no evidence collected by the Investigating Agency despite the crime weapon as well as motorcycle which the petitioner allegedly admitted to produce during interrogation, making the case of petitioner that of further inquiry under section 497(2), Cr.P.C for the purpose of bail. The alleged guilt of the petitioner would be determined by the learned trial Court having recourse to the evidence. It is a settled law that if accused has a good case for post arrest bail, the plea of the complainant to send him behind the bars for few days by dismissing his application for pre-arrest bail is held to be ludicrous. Case law is cited upon “Muhammad Aslam v. The State” (2000 YLR 1314). Further, the parties are inimical with each other over property dispute, as such, the petitioner alleged malafide on the part of complainant.
5. Therefore, without further commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner by this Court, is confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/-with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
6. Before parting with this order, I deem necessary to observe that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and shall have no bearing effect on any of the other proceeding connected to this case.
(K.Q.B.) Bail accepted
0 Comments