MUHAMMAD ALAM vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail application filed by applicant Muhammad Alam in Crime No. 88 of 2007 registered under sections 392 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Saud Abad. The core legal question concerns whether the applicant is entitled to post-arrest bail given the allegations of being caught red-handed with robbed property, weighed against previous monetary disputes and litigation between the parties. The Sindh High Court held that the existence of previous litigation creates doubt regarding the credibility of the complainant and witnesses, and since the alleged offense does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused is entitled to bail as his case calls for further inquiry. The court consequently admitted the applicant to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing solvent surety.
- Whether an accused is entitled to post-arrest bail when the offense does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does previous litigation between the parties create sufficient grounds for further inquiry into the guilt of the accused for the purpose of bail?
- Can bail be granted when the recovery of robbed property is disputed due to prior monetary disputes between the complainant and the accused?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' MRS. QAISER IQBAL, J.--- Applicant Muhammad Alam has applied for post-arrest bail in Crime No,88 of 2007 under section 392/34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Saud Abad.
2. ' The allegations contained in. The First Information Report are that complainant Akhtar Masood Gil lodged report that he along with his friend Faizan and Jones were chatting in Millat Garden behind Al Johar Grammar School, a car approached the scene of occurrence boarded by two persons, on show of force culprits searched the complainant robbed his purse containing cash along with original N.I.C. And YMCA card from Faizan and Jones cash along with other articles were surreptitiously robbed, in the meanwhile police mobile hailing from Saudabad Police Station reached at the place of occurrence arrested the applicant, secured complainant's purse and other articles along with .32 bore revolver. Report was lodged to connect the applicant in the commission of the crime.
3. ' Learned counsel contends that the applicant has lent money to the complainant, on demand refused to return the same and threatened to involve him in false litigation. This factum was brought to the notice of Police Station Saudabad through a written complaint dated 24th May, 2007 which manifestly suggest that first Information report has been manipulated as no such incident had taken place, investigation has completed. Challan has been submitted before the competent Court of law.
4. ' Learned State counsel has opposed the bail application on the premises that applicant was caught red-handed, recovery of the robbed property was effected from his possession therefore, the applicant is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. I have taken into consideration respective arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. There appears to be a previous litigation between the applicant and the respondent which caused doubt in the credential of the complainant and witnesses. It is well-settled that while considering bail matter of accused involved in an offence which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Court must proceed to release the accused if sufficient grounds were available for further inquiry into his guilt. In the above view I am fortified from the dictum laid down in the cases reported as 1973 PCr.LJ 125, 2006 PCr.LJ 1628 (Karachi) and 2007 YLR 1144 (Karachi).
6. ' Having regards to the above facts and circumstances, the applicant Muhammad Alam is admitted on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in a sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.