Mian MUHAMMAD LATIF vs THE STATE
This petition for pre-arrest bail arose out of FIR No. 188 registered at Police Station Liaqatabad, Lahore, for offences under Sections 337-H(2), 452, 506, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co-accused, trespassed into a house while armed, made aerial firing, and issued death threats. The central legal question was whether pre-arrest bail should be confirmed given the delay in lodging the FIR, absence of physical damage or recovered empties, and existing background animosity. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition and confirmed the interim anticipatory bail previously granted. The Court held that an unexplained delay of nineteen days in lodging the FIR, combined with a history of extensive litigation and animosity between the parties, creates a strong possibility of false involvement. Furthermore, where indiscriminate firing is alleged but causes no damage and yields no empties from the spot, the grant of pre-arrest bail is justified.
- Whether an unexplained inordinate delay in lodging an FIR can be a ground for granting pre-arrest bail?
- Does the existence of prior hostility and multiple criminal cases between parties justify the inference of potential false involvement for pre-arrest bail?
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be confirmed when allegations of indiscriminate firing result in no injury, damage, or recovered empties?
- Section 337-H(2), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 506, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' M. BILAL KHAN, J.---Mian Muhammad Latif son of Baha Ali, the petitioner, by filing the instant petition seeks his pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.188, dated 9-4-2005, registered at Police Station, Liaqatabad, District Lahore for offences under sections 337-H(2), 452, 506, 148 and 149, P.P.C. At the instance of Muhammad Younas Anjum.
2. Succinctly, the allegation against the petitioner and his co-accused, namely, Abbas, Suleman, Mst. Razia Bibi and an unknown, according to the F.I.R., was that they while carrying different fire- arms trespassed into house of Mst. Akbari Begum, sister of the complainant, raised Lalkaras issuing threats of life and made aerial firing.
3. The petitioner's plea for pre-arrest bail did not find favour with the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, who turned down his application vide order dated 12-5-2005. Hence, the instant petition.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record brought by Abdul Razzaq, S.-I./Investigating Officer.
5. It has been observed that there is inordinate delay of nineteen days in lodging the F.I.R. There is longstanding animosity between the parties and as many as two dozens of criminal cases had been registered in the past. The allegation against the petitioner and his co-accused was that they made indiscriminate firing, but no damage has been caused to anybody. Even no empty could be recovered by the police from the spot. Keeping in view the background of animosity, the possibility of false involvement of the petitioner cannot straightaway be ruled out.
6. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the interim anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner by this Court vide order dated 17-6-2005 is hereby confirmed.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD AZIZ vs STATE etc. PLJ 2011 Cr.C. (Lahore) 124