MUHAMMAD SHAHZAD vs STATE and another
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, Muhammad Shehzad, who was charged under Sections 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, following an alleged recovery of distilling material and indigenous liquor. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the nature of the offences and the circumstances of the case. The Court observed that the alleged offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner was a first-time offender with no prior criminal record, and the investigation had already been completed. Emphasizing that the petitioner had been incarcerated since his arrest, the Court held that continued detention would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court granted the bail application, directing the petitioner to furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the trial court.
- Does an offence under the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is a first-time offender entitled to post-arrest bail when the investigation is complete and the offence is outside the prohibitory clause?
- Section 3, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Muhammad Shehzad, the petitioner, by submitting the instant application has sought post-arrest bail in the case FIR No, 449/2008 dated 27.9.2008 registered at Police Station Makhdoom Rasheed, District Multan, in respect of the offences under Sections 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979.
2. Precisely the prosecution's story as narrated in the F.I.R is that on a tip off; a raid was conducted by a police party headed by Ghulam Rasool Tahir, S.I., in Basti Qatar Mauza Habibabad. As a consequence of the said raid the petitioner along with his co-accused were allegedly found distilling indigenous liquor. The raiding party succeeded to apprehend the petitioner, whereas, Rana Tariq, co-accused, statedly succeeded to make good his escape. The raiding party took into possession the distilling material besides 15 liters indigenous liquor.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. I have straightaway- noticed that none of the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. It is not denied by the learned Deputy Prosecutor General that the petitioner is debutante in this field, as no case prior to this one stands registered against him. The investigation has already been completed. The petitioner has been suffering pre-trial punishment since 27.9.2008. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served by detaining him in jail, any more. Consequently, while placing reliance on the case of Tariq Bashir and 5 others v. The State (PLD 1995 SC 34), the application in hand is accepted and the petitioner is allowed concession of post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in a sum of Rs,50,000/- (rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.