Haji GUL MUHAMMAD vs THE STATE
This petition for pre-arrest bail arises from a criminal case registered under sections 382 and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, concerning allegations of cattle theft. The petitioner sought pre-arrest bail, arguing that the First Information Report was lodged with an unexplained delay of ten days and that multiple police investigations had previously declared him innocent. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail given the conflicting investigation reports and the nature of the evidence regarding his alleged abetment. The Court observed that while police opinions are not binding, the consistency of multiple investigations finding the petitioner innocent, coupled with the lack of evidence regarding the alleged conspiracy, raised significant doubts about the prosecution's case. Consequently, the Court held that the possibility of false implication could not be ruled out. The petition was accepted, and the ad interim pre-arrest bail was confirmed. The key principle established is that where multiple investigations consistently find an accused innocent and the prosecution fails to provide evidence for specific charges like conspiracy, pre-arrest bail is warranted to prevent misuse of the criminal process.
- Is an accused entitled to pre-arrest bail when multiple police investigations have declared him innocent?
- Does a significant unexplained delay in lodging an FIR constitute grounds for granting pre-arrest bail?
- Can an accused be denied bail when the prosecution fails to provide evidence regarding the time and place of an alleged conspiracy?
- Section 498, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 382, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
'Through this petition under section 498, Cr.P.C. Haji Gul Muhammad petitioner seeks bail before arrest in case F.I.R. No,272, dated 30-8-2001 registered under sections 382/109, P.P.C. At Police Station Shedani District Rahimyar Khan.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is about cattle lifting of complainant in the night between 19/20-7-2004 and he along with other co-accused was seen by the P. Ws. Near river.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the F.I.R. Was lodged with the delay of 10 days without any explanation. Further contends that five investigations had been conducted in which the petitioner was found innocent but in the last investigation conducted by Inspector Range Crime Branch, he has been made an accused for abetment without any evidence.
4. Learned State Counsel opposes this bail application on the ground that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. And it is not a fit case for grant of bail before arrest.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the record. Specific allegation was levelled that the petitioner along with the co-accused was seen by the complainant and the other witnesses while taking away the stolen buffaloes but in spite of that F.I.R. Was lodged with the delay of 10 days without any explanation. In the five successive investigations conducted by S.H.O. Police Station Liaquatpur. D.S.P. Sadiqabad, A.S.P. Sadiqabad and Additional S.P. Rahimyar Khan, the petitioner has been found innocent but in the last investigation conducted by Inspector Range Crime Branch, he has been made an accused only for abetment of commission of the offence. No doubt opinion of the police is not binding on the Courts but consistently holding of the police that the petitioner was innocent and even in the final investigation it has not been held that the petitioner was present at the spot and had taken the buffaloes but he has been challaned that he had hatched conspiracy with the co-accused for the theft of the buffaloes. No time and place when and where the conspiracy was hatched up was mentioned by the witnesses and no evidence was collected by the last Investigating Officer in this regard. The possibility of false implication of the petitioner in the present case cannot be ruled out. It is a fit case for the grant of bail before arrest. Hence, this application is accepted and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide order dated 15-9-2004 is confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Judicial/Illaqa Magistrate.
Pre-arrest .