Syed AZMAT HUSSAIN SHAH vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Syed Azmat Hussain Shah in relation to F.I.R. No. 253 dated 20-6-2008 registered under Section 377/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Shahzad Town, Islamabad. The core legal question before the court was whether a compromise between the parties and the forgiveness by the complainant can be considered as a ground for granting post-arrest bail when the offence is non-compoundable under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Islamabad High Court held that although the offence is non-compoundable and does not fall within the ambit of Section 345 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the fact that the complainant does not wish to pursue the matter and has forgiven the accused through an out-of-court compromise is a relevant factor to be considered at the bail stage. The court laid down the principle that a complainant's statement and affidavit regarding compromise, even in non-compoundable offences, can be weighed as a ground for the grant of bail.
- Can a compromise between the parties be considered as a relevant factor for granting bail in a non-compoundable offence?
- Whether an affidavit of forgiveness by the complainant can influence the court's discretion at the bail stage?
- Section 377, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 345, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, J.--- Petitioner seeks his post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,253, dated 20- 6-2008 registered under section 377/34, P.P.C., at Police Station Shahzad Town (Islamabad).
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the parties have entered into compromise and complainant of this case has forgiven the accused/petitioner in the name of Almighty Allah, regarding which has also submitted an affidavit on record.
3. On the other hand, learned Federal Counsel has opposed this bail petition, on the ground that the offence is not compoundable.
4. I have heard arguments of both sides and perused the record.
5. RAJA SAEED AKRAM KHAN, J.--- Petitioner seeks his Today, the complainant has himself appeared before the Court and affirmed the contents of affidavit sworn by him, regarding compromise with the accused/petitioner. Although the case is not compoundable and does not fall within the ambit of section 345, Cr.P.0 , however, when the complainant does not want to pursue the matter further and has forgiven the accused/petitioner by entering into compromise outside the Court, his statement/affidavit can be considered as one of the relevant factor, for grant of relief to the petitioner, at bail stage.
6. Resultantly, this petition is accepted and petitioner is admitted to bail, subject to furnishing bail bond valuing Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 3 cases
- FIDA AHMAD Versus State 2020 YLRN 153
- Imran S/o Akhtar vs The State 2017 SHC 93
- IMRAN Versus State 2018 PCrLJN 20