FATEH MUHAMMAD and another vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail application filed on behalf of the petitioners in respect of F.I.R. No. 138 of 2007 registered under sections 379, 353, 186, 337-L(iii), 147, 149, 411, and 337-A(ii) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Gunjial, District Khushab. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to post-arrest bail when the offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, investigation is complete, and co-accused have already been granted relief. The Lahore High Court allowed the bail application, holding that keeping the petitioners behind bars would serve no useful purpose and constitute punishment where the offences do not attract the prohibitory clause and further investigation is unnecessary. The key principle laid down is that bail should not be withheld as a punishment when the case does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and the accused are no longer required for investigative purposes.
- Are petitioners entitled to post-arrest bail when the alleged offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be refused or withheld as a punishment when the accused are no longer required for further investigation?
- Does the grant of bail to co-accused support the concession of bail to remaining petitioners under similar circumstances?
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 186, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.--- The learned counsel seeks post-arrest bail of petitioners in F.I.R.
No,138 of 2007, dated 24-6-2007 under sections 379, 353, 186, 337-L(iii), 147, 149, P.P.C. Read with sections 411, 337-A(ii), P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Gunjial, District Khushab.
2. The allegation against the petitioners is that they stole wood from the forest and when intercepted by the complainant, etc. Caused injuries with Sota along with their co-accused.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, Punjab. Out of eight accused, three have been found innocent by the police, two co-accused have also been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The investigation in this case has already been completed. The allegation against petitioner No,1 is of theft whereas allegation against petitioner No,2 is of causing injuries with Sota on the complainant, etc. The offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, A Cr.P.C. The value of the stolen wood is also not more than Rs,10,000. The petitioners are not required anymore for investigation. Therefore, in the above circumstances no useful purpose would be served if the bail is refused to them or withheld as a punishment.
' In view of the above, this bail application is allowed subject to petitioner's furnishing surety bonds in the sum of Rs,20,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court of Area Magistrate.
Cited by 1 case
- WAHID GUL vs THE STATE 2011 YLR 2155