MUHAMMAD ARIF BAIG vs THE STATE
This matter arises from an application for post-arrest bail filed by Muhammad Arif Baig in relation to Crime No. 230/2006 registered under sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Act at Police Station Pak Colony, Karachi, following the alleged recovery of a hand-grenade. The core legal question is whether the applicant is entitled to post-arrest bail when the Bomb Disposal Inspector's report regarding the serviceability of the recovered hand-grenade is missing from the record and the trial has been delayed. The court held that the absence of the expert report bringing the matter within the scope of further inquiry under subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, combined with the prolonged incarceration of nineteen months without framing of the charge, entitles the applicant to bail. The key principle laid down is that where crucial expert verification is absent from the record and the trial is unduly delayed, the case warrants the grant of post-arrest bail under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
- Whether the absence of a Bomb Disposal Inspector report on the serviceability of a recovered explosive makes the case one of further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does prolonged incarceration without framing of a charge justify the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Is an accused entitled to bail in an explosive act case when the main connected case has already resulted in bail?
- Section 4, Explosive Act
- Section 5, Explosive Act
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' Mrs. QAISER IQBAL, J.---Applicant Muhammad Arif Baig son of Saeed Baig, has applied for post- arrest bail in Crime No.230/2006, under sections 4/5 of Explosive Act registered at Police Station Pak Colony, Karachi.
2. ' Succinctly, facts leading to the case are that applicant was arrested on 9-12-2006 after police encounter, one hand-grenade was recovered from his possession in presence of Head Constable Muhammad Hussain and Police Constable Ali Dost. Consequent thereupon, F.I.R. No.229/06, under sections 353/324/34, P.P.C. Was registered beside F.I.R. No.230/2006 under sections 4/5 of Explosive Act, upon completion of the investigation, the applicant was sent up to face trial.
3. ' Mr. Muhammad Akbar Awan, learned counsel has contended that the applicant has been admitted on bail in Crime No.229/06, whereas the present F.I.R. Is outshoot of the main case. It is urged that no evidence is available to connect the applicant as subverter or saboteur nor expert report is available on police file. It is urged that in the absence of the report of Bomb Disposal Inspector to the effect whether the hand-grenade was in serviceable condition or not, case against the applicant requires further inquiry as contemplated by subsection-2 of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. ' Miss. Afsheen Aman, has vehemently opposed the plea raised on behalf of the applicant contended that the applicant is not entitled to concession of bail.
5. It transpires that the applicant was enlarged on bail in the main case, present case is outshoot of the Crime No.229/06, it also transpires that hand-grenade secured from possession of the applicant was examined by Bomb Disposal Inspector, his report is not available on record to suggest whether the same was in serviceable condition or not. Applicant is behind the bars from the last nineteen months even charge has not been framed by the trial Court nor there is any likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future.
6. ' In view of the above facts and circumstances, applicant Muhammad Arif is hereby admitted on bail, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.