GHULAM ABBAS vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, a jail official, who was charged under sections 419, 205, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution alleged that the applicant, while serving as a jailor at Sub-jail Mehar, facilitated the escape of an under-trial prisoner by allowing his brother to be held in custody in his place. The applicant contended that he had been handed the wrong individual by the Mukhtiarkar and that he had not committed any criminal offense. The core legal question was whether, given the conflicting versions of the events and the nature of the alleged offense, the applicant was entitled to the grant of bail pending trial. The Court held that the defense plea and the prosecution's allegations required further inquiry. Furthermore, the Court determined that the alleged offenses did not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the applicant, subject to the furnishing of a surety bond.
- Does an allegation of substituting a prisoner in jail custody require further inquiry for the purpose of bail?
- Are offenses under sections 419, 205, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 covered by the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 419, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 205, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' FAISAL ARAB, J.--- Applicant Ghulam Abbas Sodhar indicated as accused in Crime No,94 of 2005 of Police Station Mehar, for offence punishable under sections 419, 205, 34, P.P.C., seeks bail.
2. ' The case against the applicant is that he was jailor sub-jail Mehar and was handed over custody of two under-trial prisoners on 26-5-2005. The two accused persons, who were handed over, were said to be Deedar and Sudheer, both by caste Khoso. However, on 9-6-2005 upon inspection it was found that Sudheer Khoso was not in custody and in fact his brother Ali Mardan was in custody.
3. ' The case of the prosecution is that the applicant allowed the real accused Sudheer to escape in place of his brother Ali Mardan Khoso.
4. ' It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he was Clerk of Mukhtiarkar and was made Jailor of the Sub-jail, Mehar by the Mukhtiarkar and on 26-5-2005 he was handed over custody of Ali Mardan Khoso, who was shown to be Sudheer Khoso. It is next contended that it was no criminal offence committed by him but in fact the custody of a wrong person was handed over to him.
5. ' The defence plea and the allegations require further inquiry. The offence also does not come within the prohibition contained in section 497, Cr.P.C. The applicant is, therefore, enlarged on bail on furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,3,00,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 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 2 cases
- Ikraam Khan and others vs The State 2022 PCRLJ 1250
- IKRAAM KHAN Versus State 2022 PTD 1566