JAFFAR HUSSAIN and others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioners in connection with F.I.R. No. 475 of 2005, registered under sections 337-A(ii), 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-F(ii), 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), 337-L(ii), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Harappa, District Sahiwal. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to the extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail given the allegations of specific roles in a daylight occurrence and the lack of investigation participation. The Court held that the petitioners were not entitled to bail, noting that they were nominated in the F.I.R. with specific roles attributed to them, had failed to join the investigation, and were declared guilty during the investigation. The Court emphasized that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon establishing mala fides by the prosecution or clear evidence of false implication. Finding no such grounds, the Court dismissed the petition and recalled the interim pre-arrest bail previously granted to the petitioners.
- Is pre-arrest bail available to an accused who has failed to join the investigation?
- What is the standard for granting pre-arrest bail in cases where the accused is nominated in the F.I.R. with a specific role?
- Does the mere allegation of previous enmity or false implication automatically entitle an accused to pre-arrest bail?
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI, J.--- Petitioners have sought their pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,475 of 2005 dated 24-9-2005 registered under sections 337-A(ii)/337-A(i)/337-F(i)/337-F(ii)/337-F (iii)/337-F(v)/337-L(ii)/148/149, P.P.C. At Police Station Harappa District Sahiwal.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioners as per prosecution story is that they along with other co-accused armed with various weapons hatchets and Sotas etc., on the Lalkara of Nawaz petitioner/accused injured Zulfiqar, Tanveer, Gulzar, Manzoor and others in furtherance of their common intention.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case on the basis of previous enmity; that the accused party has also filed complaint against the complainant and others, wherein they have been summoned by the learned trial Court; that there is unexplained delay of six days in lodging the F.I.R. And offence against the petitioners does not fall within prohibitory clause. That in fact the complainant party was aggressor and the petitioners also received injuries during the occurrence.
4. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State assisted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of complainant has vehemently opposed the bail petition and submitted that this is a daylight occurrence; that the petitioners are nominated in the F.I.R. And specific role has been attributed to them.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Petitioners are nominated in the F.I.R. And they have been attributed specific role. The investigation is incomplete as the petitioners/accused have not joined the investigation. There is no mala fide on the part of the complainant side to falsely involve the petitioners. Pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief which can only be granted if there is mala fide on the part of the complainant or there are sound reasons to believe that accused persons have been falsely involved. Furthermore, the petitioners have also been declared guilty during the course of investigation. I do not find any such reason at this stage to grant extraordinary relief to the petitioners. Concession of bail before arrest is granted to an accused if it is established that his involvement in the case is based on mala fides by the prosecution, reliance is placed on Mst. Qudrat Bibi v. Muhammad Iqbal and another 2003 SCM R 68.
6. For what has been discussed above I do not find any merit in this petition which is hereby dismissed and interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners vide order, dated 19-1- 2006 is hereby recalled.