SABIR HUSSAIN vs THE STATE
The petitioner, Sabir Hussain, sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 144 registered under Section 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Pacca Laran, relating to the alleged snatching of a motorcycle while armed. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given the facts and circumstances of the case, including the delay in the trial and lack of recovery. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail, noting that he had been incarcerated for over a year following the completion of investigation, no recovery was effected from him, he had no previous criminal record, and not a single witness had been examined by the trial court. The key principle laid down is that prolonged incarceration without the commencement of trial, coupled with the absence of recoveries and lack of previous criminal record, constitutes sufficient ground for the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Whether prolonged incarceration without the commencement of trial is a ground for post-arrest bail?
- Does the absence of any recovery from the accused justify the grant of bail in a robbery case?
- Is a petitioner with no previous criminal record entitled to bail under Section 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Sabir Hussain son of Muhammad Ismail-petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,144 registered at Police Station Pacca Laran, on 26-5-2002, for offence under section 392, P.P.C.
2. Briefly, the allegation against the petitioner is that he while armed with .12 bore pistol alongwith other co-accused snatched the motorcycle from the complainant.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case. It has been noticed that the petitioner was arrested on 21-6-2003, more than a year ago, and was lodged in the judicial lock-up after completion of investigation; that no recovery was effected from the petitioner; that there is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner was previously involved in any criminal activities; and that so far not a single witness has been recorded by the learned trial Court. Considering all the facts mentioned above, I am inclined to admit the petitioner to bail, subject to his tendering bail bonds in the sum of Rs,one lac, with two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.