ADAM S.I.P. vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Sindh High Court upon an application for pre-arrest bail in respect of crime No. 245 of 2005 registered at Police Station Dadu under Article 155 of the Police Order, 2002. The core legal question concerns whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to a senior police officer accused of negligence in the performance of duty for allegedly delaying the dispatch of case property for chemical examination by over ten months. The court held that the applicant had applied for permission to send the case property, was subsequently suspended and transferred before obtaining such permission, and that the delay was not attributable to his personal negligence, as confirmed by the State Counsel. Consequently, recognizing that the arrest of a senior police officer would entail unwarranted humiliation, the court confirmed the pre-arrest bail subject to the furnishing of solvent surety. The key principle laid down is that pre-arrest bail may be granted where the allegations of official negligence prima facie lack active culpability due to intervening suspension and transfer, and where arrest would cause unwarranted humiliation.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted to a police officer accused of delay in sending case property for chemical examination?
- Does the suspension and transfer of an investigating officer negate prima facie allegations of negligence in duty for the purposes of bail?
- Is the potential humiliation of a senior police officer a relevant factor in considering pre-arrest bail?
- Article 155, Police Order 2002
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' MUSHIR ALAM, J.--- Pre-arrest bail is claimed in crime No,245 of 2005, Police Station Dadu for an offence under Article 155 of Police Order, 2002. It appears that the applicant is a senior Police Officer and was investigating crime for an offence under section 302, P.P.C. Allegations against him of neglected in performance of duty in accordance with law, rules and regulations inasmuch as he delayed sending of the case property for 10 months and 15 days for chemical examination.
2. ' It is stated that he applied for the permission to send the case property on 15-12-2004 to the S.P.
3. (Investigation), Dadu. Before he could obtain such permission, he was suspended and shifted vide order, dated 12-3-2005. According to the learned counsel, since he was suspended he could not follow up the matter, as the property was available with the concerned Head Munshi. The permission to send the case property was given much later and it was sent, therefore, apparently there is no delay or negligence on the part of the applicant. Such facts are confirmed by the learned State Counsel.
4. ' In the circumstances, the applicant is a senior Police Officer, his arrest indeed be a humiliation.
5. Accordingly, appellant is extended benefit of bail before arrest however, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,one hundred thousand and P.R. Bond in the like amount, to the satisfaction of trial Court.
6. Disposed off.