Skip to main content

Pre-arrest bail

PLJ 2018 Cr.C. 710[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
PresentSardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, J.
HAFIZ GHULAM HAIDER--Petitioner
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 6438-B of 2017, decided on 13.11.2017.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 354 & 379--Pre-arrest bail--Grant of--Confirmed--Allegation of--Assaulted, outrage her modesty coupled with extortion--Inordinate delay in lodging FIR--As per FIR, no weapon of offence has been used by petitioner in order to give beat to complainant rather in MLC of injured/complainant it is written that blunt weapon has been used by petitioner, which smacks mala fide on part of complainant--Moreover, MLC was conducted after eight days of occurrence--Besides, complainant did not appear before Radiologist in order to strengthen her MLC which shows false implication of petitioner in this case--Prima facie, prosecution has no sufficient incriminating material to connect petitioner with commission of alleged offence and chances of petitioner’s false implication with deliberation after consultation cannot be ruled out--Bail was confirmed.
                                                                          [Pp. 711 & 712] A & B
Good Case for Post arrest bail--
----Settled Law--It is settled law if accused has a good case for post arrest bail, plea of complainant to send him behind bars for few days by dismissing her application for pre-arrest bail was held to be ludicrous.            [P. 712] C
Muhammad Aslam v. The State 2000 YLR 1314, Nazar Muhammad and 2 others v. The State 2012 PCr.LJ. 430 & Rana Muhammad Arshad v. Muhammad Rafique and another PLD 2009 SC 427, ref.
Pre-arrest bail--
----Extraordinary relief--To protect innocent persons--It is held that pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary relief to be granted only in extraordinary situations to protect innocent persons against victimization through abuse of law for ulterior motive--Needless to mention here that object of pre-arrest bail is to protect innocent persons from harassment, humiliation and incarceration at hands of police. [P. 712] D
Mr. Muhammad Basir Khan Sikhani, Advocate with Petitioner.
Mirza Abid MajeedDPG for State.
Mr. Israr Hayat Sulehria, Advocate for Complainant.
Date of hearing: 13.11.2017.
Order
By filing instant petition under Section 498, Cr.P.C., the petitioner namely Hafiz Ghulam Haiderseeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 554/2017, dated 12.9.2017, under Sections 354/379, PPC, registered with the Police Station Khangarh, District Muzaffargarh.
2.  Briefly, the facts of the case as reported by the complainant are that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner has assaulted the complainant in order to outrage her modesty coupled with extortion from her Rs. 12,000/-.
3.  Heard. Record perused.
4.  There is inordinate delay of almost eight days in lodging of instant FIR, which is fatal to the case of prosecution. Guidance is sought from Nadeem alias Nanha alias Billa Sher v. The State (2010 SCMR 949).
5.  As per FIR, no weapon of offence has been used by the petitioner in order to give beat to the complainant rather in the MLC of the injured/complainant it is written that blunt weapon has been used by the petitioner, which smacks mala fide on the part of the complainant. Moreover, the MLC was conducted after eight days of the occurrence. Besides, the complainant did not appear before the Radiologist in order to strengthen her MLC which shows the false implication of the petitioner in this case.
6.  The above facts leads me to draw an inference that prima facie, the prosecution has no sufficient incriminating material to connect the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence and

chances of petitioner’s false implication with deliberation after consultation cannot be ruled out.
7.  It is settled law 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 her application for pre-arrest bail was held to be ludicrous. Case law is cited upon “Muhammad Aslam v. The State” (2000 YLR 1314) and Nazar Muhammad and 2 others v. The State” (2012 P Cr. L J 430). As per dictum laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Rana Muhammad Arshad v. Muhammad Rafique and another” (PLD 2009 Supreme Court 427), it is held that pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary relief to be granted only in extraordinary situations to protect innocent persons against victimization through abuse of law for ulterior motive. Needless to mention here that object of pre-arrest bail is to protect the innocent persons from harassment, humiliation and incarceration at the hands of police.
8.  For the above reasons, this petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner 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 learned trial Court. It is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature, and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition.
(A.A.K.)          Bail confirmed

For more, you can consult omara.khan789@gmail.com or call +923123450006

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

When an application for restoration of suit is allowed, all interim orders passed prior to dismissal of suit for non-prosecution, stand revived

PLJ 2018 Islamabad 276 Present :  Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, J. M/s. PANTHER DEVELOPERS--Petitioner versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (ADJ), WEST, ISLAMABAD and 2 others--Respondents W.P. No. 977 of 2018, decided on 10.4.2018. Islamabad Rent Restriction Ordinance, 2001 (IV of 2001)-- ----S. 17(9)--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199--Execution of lease agreement--Default in payment of rent--Violation of terms and Conditions--Eviction Petition--Dismissed for non prosecution--Application for restoration--Allowed--Tentative order--Struck off right of defence--Eviction Petition allowed--Appeal was dismissed--Determination--Direction to--It is well settled that when a suit is dismissed for non-prosecution, and an application for restoration is filed, Court/Tribunal can, while said application is pending, pass interim orders--It is also well settled that when an application for restoration of suit is allowed, all interim orders passed prior to dismissal of suit for non...

Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005

PLJ 2018 Lahore 868 [Multan Bench, Multan] Present :  Mujahid Mustaqeem Ahmed, J. MUHAMMAD AMIN--Appellant versus MUHAMMAD SARWAR--Respondent F.A.O. No. 130 of 2016, heard on 5.10.2017. Punjab Consumer Protection Act, 2005-- ----Ss. 19, 28 & 33--Seed Act, 1976, Ss. 22-B, 22-C, 22-E, 22-D & 23--Purchasing of hybird seed substandard quantity--Issuance of legal notice--Complaint before district consumer Court--Partly allowed--Suffering of Fiscal loss and mental agony--Question of--Whether purchased seed was hybird or substandard--Direction to--Respondent was under legal obligation to get his crop inspected from Obriculturist, Agriculture Officer or any expert of Research Center to obtain expert report/lab report of plants to corroborate his version--Laboratory tests and analysis of such experts are quite helpful   to   determine controversial   issue,   involved in such like cases--It is manifest that a detailed and effective procedure has b...

Divorce is not possible during pregnancy

A Muslim woman cannot be divorced during pregnancy. If a husband pronounces divorce to his wife during pregnancy, it is immaterial till delivery. However, if after delivery of child, it is not reconciled within 90 days, it becomes divorce. The reason is that the Iddah of a Muslim woman is 90 days after pronouncement of divorce by the husband. If divorce is pronounced to a Muslim wife during pregnancy, it becomes effective automatically after the end of pregnancy. The iddat of such lady starts from that day and if the divorce is not revoked in such time period of 90 days, then it becomes complete divorce. Once a women completes her Iddat after divorce, it means the divorce is final and irrevocable between parties. For  more , you can consult omara.khan789@gmail.com or call +923123450006