IKHTIAR KHAN vs THE STATE
This bail application arose from the arrest of the applicant, Ikhtiar Khan, who was charged under Sections 379 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for allegedly stealing railway property. The applicant sought post-arrest bail after the trial court rejected his initial plea. Counsel for the applicant argued that the lack of a formal complaint from the Pakistan Railways regarding missing stock created doubt in the prosecution's case and highlighted a violation of Section 103 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 regarding the recovery proceedings. The State opposed the bail, citing the recovery of stolen railway material from the applicant's possession. The Court observed that even if the prosecution's allegations were accepted as true, the offense would likely fall under Section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which does not carry a penalty of death or life imprisonment. Consequently, the Court held that the case did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and admitted the applicant to bail.
- Does a charge under Section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the alleged offense is not punishable by death or life imprisonment and does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 103, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' MRS. QAISAR IQBAL, J.---Applicant Ikhtiar Khan son of Haji Misri Khan has resorted to file bail application under section 497, Cr.P.C. Seeking bail in Crime No.26 of 2005, under sections 379 and 34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station, Railway City Karachi. The applicant's bail plea was rejected by the learned VIIth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karachi South, therefore, he has resorted to seek redress by filing this application.
2. ' The necessary facts leading to the application are that the complainant S.I.P. Muhammad Aslam lodged report on 6-9-2005, stating therein that he was patrolling along with his staff at Army Yard Keamari Karachi and was busy on special checking reached near Gulzar Masjid and found two persons carrying heavy material in their hands proceeding towards the Massan Phatak, they were called upon to stop and with the help of the subordinate staff, applicant and his associates were searched and from the possession of applicant four air-pressure pipes railway material wrapped in white plastic bag were secured, while the similar recovery of the material was effected from the possession of the co-accused Khalid son of Nazir Gul. The applicant was connected in commission of the charged offence.
3. ' The learned counsel appearing for the 'applicant has contended that Pakistan Railway has not proceeded to file any complaint about the missing of the material or any other stock, in the absence of such report a serious doubt is created in the prosecution story regarding the arrest of the applicant along with alleged recovered articles, the property of Railway Department. It is next urged that there is violation of section 103, Cr.P.C. As the Mashirnama was prepared in the presence of employees of the Railway Police, which also speaks in volume about the manner of the investigation. It is urged that the challan has been submitted and the applicant is no more required in connection with the investigation of this case. In support of the above contention reliance is placed on the case of Tariq Bashir v. The State PLD 1995 SC 34 and Muhammad Masood v. The State 2004 M LD 648.
4. ' The learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the bail application on the premises that after arrest of the applicant four air-pressure pipes, were secured from the possession of the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced at the bar. The applicant is involved in stealing the property belonging to Pakistan Railways out of which four air- pressure pipes allegedly were secured from the possession of the applicant, at the best if the facts are taken to be correct the case against the applicant falls within the category of section 411, P.P.C., which is not punishable with death imprisonment for life or for 10 years, the case of the applicant, otherwise, not falls within the prohibitory clause contained in section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
6. ' In the light of the above circumstances, applicant Ikhtiar Khan son of Haji Misri Khan is admitted on bail, upon furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.