SAFDAR HUSSAIN vs THE STATE
This petition concerns a request for post-arrest bail by the petitioner, Safdar Hussain, in a case registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following an FIR lodged with a delay of approximately three and a half months. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances of the case and the nature of the alleged offence. The Court observed that the FIR itself indicated no contractual relationship between the petitioner and the complainant, rendering the applicability of Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, a matter requiring further probe. Furthermore, the Court noted that the investigation was finalized, the petitioner's continued incarceration served no beneficial purpose, and the offence did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court held that the case warranted further inquiry into the petitioner's guilt and admitted him to post-arrest bail, establishing the principle that where an offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause and investigation is complete, bail should be granted pending further inquiry.
- Does the offence under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is a delay in lodging an FIR a relevant factor for the grant of bail?
- When the investigation is finalized, is the continued custody of an accused necessary if the offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Through this petition Sardar Hussain petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.442, registered at Police Station, Satellite Town, Gujranwala on 27-7-2004 for an offence under section 489-F, P.P.C.
2. The F.I.R. In this case had been) lodged with a delay of about three and a half months. According to the F.I.R. Itself the present petitioner had not entered into any contract with the complainant and, thus, mere giving of a cheque by the petitioner to the complainant prima facie may not show that the same was given by the petitioner to the complainant towards fulfilment of any obligation. In this view of the matter the question regarding applicability of the provisions of section 489-F, P.P.C.
To the allegation against the petitioner calls for further probe at this stage. The petitioner is lodged in judicial lock-up as the investigation qua him has already been finalized and, thus, his continued custody is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage. The offence alleged against the petitioner does not attract the prohibitory clause contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
In the circumstances mentioned above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 4 cases
- ARIF IQBAL Versus State 2016 PCrLJN 57
- FARHAJ AHMED vs The STATE 2014 MLD 433
- IMRAN vs THE STATE 2011 MLD 462
- SHAHID AZIZ Versus State 2007 YLR 1810