MUHAMMAD ILYAS and 2 otherss vs THE STATE
The petitioners sought pre-arrest bail in respect of case F.I.R. No. 137 dated 8-3-2005 registered under sections 468, 467, 471, 420, 506, 406, and 379 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Gulshan-e-Ravi, Lahore. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to pre-arrest bail when they were nominated in the F.I.R. and repeatedly failed to join the police investigation despite being granted interim bail. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioners were not entitled to pre-arrest bail as they had failed to join the investigation and prima facie appeared to be involved in the commission of the offence. The court laid down the principle that pre-arrest bail cannot be granted unless the necessary pre-requisites and extraordinary circumstances established by precedent, specifically the judgments in Zia-ul-Hassan v. The State and Murad Khan v. Fazal-e-Subhan, are satisfied.
- Can pre-arrest bail be granted to an accused person who fails to join the police investigation despite being granted interim protection?
- What are the pre-requisites for the grant of pre-arrest bail under Pakistani law?
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 406, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 467, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 506, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.---The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,137 dated 8- 3-2005 registered under sections 468/467/471/420/ 506/406/379, P.P.C. At Police Station, Gulshan- e-Ravi, Lahore.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners did not own vehicle, so the question of sale of the same to the complainant did not arise; the delay in lodging of F.I.R. Is unexplained which evidences false involvement of the petitioners.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State and the complainant vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners on the ground that they are nominated in the F.I.R.; that they did not join the investigation and the initial investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer reveals that they are guilty of the offence.
4. Heard and record perused.
5. The case was registered on 8-3-2005. The petitioners namely Shahid Mehmood and Muhammad Ilyas obtained interim bail which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 25-3-2005.
Again pre-arrest bail was sought and relief of interim bail was allowed till 25-4-2005. They again did not join the investigation and initiated proceedings for quashment of the F.I.R. Their application for pre-arrest bail was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 29-6-2005. They approached this Court on 9-7-2005 and were granted interim bail, but inspite of this concession, they did not join the investigation. The petitioners prima facie, appears to be involved in the case.
No grounds for grant of bail are made out.
6. It is well-settled principle of law that bail before arrest can only be granted when pre-requisites as enunciated in the case of Zia-ul-Hassan v. The State PLD 1984 SC 192 are available. Following the principle of law declared in Murad Khan v. Fazal-e-Subhan PLD 1983 SC 82 and Ziaul-Hassan's case (supra), this petition is without any merit and the same is dismissed.