' CH. MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM ZIA, J. --- The instant appeal is filed from the judgment of the Shariat Court dated 29.8.2013, whereby while accepting the revision petition filed by the accused- respondent, he has been released on bail.
2. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal as stated are that on the complaint of Zeeshan Ehsan, deceased, a case for commission of offences under sections 324, 337 and 34, ARC., was registered under F.I.R. No. 53/13, at Police Station Thothal. It is alleged in the F.I.R. That the complainant, Zeeshan Ehsan was a student of 3rd year. On the fateful day, he alongwith Umar and Naib was coming from Islamgarh to Mirpur by a Bus No. AJK-6738. It is further alleged that Mustafa alias Rasib was cleaner of the Bus which was driven by Muhammad Farooq. Due to dispute on fare harsh words were exchanged between the students and the cleaner of Bus. Consequently at about 11:30, a.m., when the Bus reached near new Toll Post, the cleaner took out the screw driver from the tool box and hit the same on the head of the complainant who got .Grievously injured. The complainant further averred that the accused, Muhammad Farooq, in the meantime with the intention to cause grievous hurt stopped the Bus and started beating him with fists and kicks. Muhammad Farooq, accused threw the complainant out of the Bus which caused him severe injuries. The occurrence is stated to be witnessed by the companions of the complainant and other passengers of Bus. Later on the complainant succumbed to the injuries. The police added Section 302, A.P.C.
3. After completion of necessary investigation, a report under Section 173, Cr.P.C, was presented in the District Criminal Court, Mirpur. The accused-respondent moved an application for grant of bail before the Trial Court on 8.4.2013 which was rejected vide judgment dated 30.4.2013. A revision petition against the order of Trial Court was filed by the accused-respondent before the Shariat Court on 29.5.2013. The learned Shariat Court vide judgment dated 29.8.2013, while accepting the revision petition released the accused-respondent subject to furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs.
20,00,000/- (twenty lac). The complainant has challenged the validity and correctness of the impugned judgment of the Shariat Court dated 29.8.2013 through the instant appeal before this Court.
4. Mr. Khalid Rashid Chaudhry, Advocate, the learned counsel for the appellant after discussion of the facts forcefully submitted that the impugned judgment of the Shariat Court is patently contradictory to the principles of administration of criminal justice. According to the prosecution story which stood fully established during investigation by bringing on record the ocular and all other relevant legal evidence, the role played by the accused-respondent is very much brutal which resulted into the death of a person who was a young student of graduation. The conduct of accused-respondent amounts to create sense of terrorism in the society and make the public service vehicle for the passengers unsafe and under threat of maltreatment. The accused- respondent stopped the bus, tortured and beaten the critically injured student passenger in a merciless manner. The accused-respondent not only felt satisfied by this cruel act rather he brutally throw him out of the bus. In fact this brutal and cruel act of the accused is the main cause of death of the deceased student. If the accused-respondent would have acted humanely, he, at the proper time should have transported the injured student to some Medical Centre for treatment, his life could have been saved. Thus, according to the evidence, the accused-respondent's connection with the commission of non-bail-able offences is fully established. The Shariat Court observed in the impugned judgment that the matter requires further probe, is totally un-based, unfounded and against the facts of the case and law. Therefore, while accepting this appeal, the impugned judgment may kindly be set aside by recalling the concession of bail extended to the accused. He placed reliance upon the case reported as Imam Bux v. The State [PLD 1983 SC 35], Muhammad Arshad and 2 others v. State [PLJ 1995 SC 684], Farmanullah v. Qadeem Khan & another [PLJ 2001 SC 722], Nadeem Akhter v. Muhammad Arshid [1994 SCR 211], Wali Muhammad v.
The State [2000 Cr.L.J. 145].
5. Conversely, Mr. Muhammad Zubair Raja, Advocate, the learned counsel for the accused- respondent forcefully defended the impugned judgment. He submitted that according to the prosecution evidence, the injuries which resulted into the death of the victim are not attributed to the accused-respondent. The only allegation against the accused-respondent is of stopping the bus, therefore, he is entitled for concession of bail-He further submitted that for recalling the concession of by the Court of competent jurisdiction, there must be some extraordinary reasons.
He also argued that the accused had no reason or enmity which may result into the commission of the offence. The appellant has failed to point any of such reason, thus, this appeal has no merits, hence, the same may be dismissed. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and examination of record, the concession of bail extended to the accused- respondent was recalled by this Court vide short order dated 23.1.2015 for the following reasons:-
6. We have considered the arguments advanced at bar and also minutely examined the record.
According to the prosecution story, a student of graduation who was in full bloom of his youth has been deprived of his right of life due to the alleged incident. The main prosecution story is not disputed as the accused is a bus driver in which the incident took place. The cleaner of the bus, for a pity amount of fare, caused serious head injury to the deceased who fell down in the bus. The accused-respondent according to the prosecution story and evidence collected during investigation despite knowledge of the fact that the deceased is injured, joined his hands with the cleaner of the bus in beating the injured person mercilessly and thereafter throwing him out of the bus in the critical condition.
7. According to the celebrated principles of administration of criminal justice, for bringing the case of accused within the ambit of further probe and inquiry, there must be some ambiguity in the prosecution story or some chain of prosecution story should have been missed or reasonable grounds and circumstances appealing to a prudent mind that for connecting the accused with the commission of alleged offences, some material is further required, must be existed. In the instant case, the prosecution story is very brief, clear and unambiguous. The tentative assessment of the evidence is sufficient to believe that the role attributed to the accused-respondent is satisfactorily established.
8. In this state of affairs, we are unable to agree with the observations of the learned Judge Shariat Court that the matter of the accused-respondent requires further probe and inquiry. According to the celebrated principle of law, at bail stage, the Court has to assess the material brought on record for making the opinion whether there are sufficient grounds to believe that against the accused, the commission of non-bailable offence has been established. The story of the instant case is very sorrowful. A young person, the student of graduation in his full bloom of youth has not only been deprived of his right of life for a pity amount of fare but such act of accused has created panic, fear and insecurity in the general public especially to the young students who travel by public service vehicles.
9. The family of the victim, for a very negligible monitory benefit, has been thrown into endless dark valley of grief and agony due to burial of a. Young member in his full bloom of youth. In every society, right of life is most prime fundamental right. All the institutions and systems are set-up only for the purpose of securing this very basic fundamental right of life. Irrespective of the fact whether the injury attributed to the accused resulted into death or not, in view of the peculiar facts of this case, the conduct of the accused-respondent is of much consideration. The most important aspect of the matter is that if the accused would have any sense of humanity, he should have rushed for facilitating the injured young person to provide him medical aid to save his life, but regrettably, according to the prosecution story, he played a brutal role, joined the hands with the other co-accused by causing fists and kicks blows to the critically injured person. His brutality not ends here rather the critically injured young student was thrown out from the vehicle by the accused-respondent. Keeping in view the whole scenario and circumstances of the case, the conduct of the accused respondent is very much unbecoming and inhumane, depriving him of any concession.
10. It is settled law that every bail matter has to be decided in the light of its peculiar facts and there can be no hard and fast rule in this regard. In our considered view, there is sufficient material for believing that the accused-respondent is involved in commission of non-bailble offences, therefore, the order passed by the Shariat Court, is not according to law. The accused- respondents case does not fall with the ambit of further inquiry thus, we are constrained to accept this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment of the Shariat Court. Consequently, the concession of bail extended to the accused respondent stands recalled. Bail after arrest cancelled