Haji MUHAMMAD MUNIR vs AMEER ABDULLAH KHAN and others
This criminal petition was filed by the complainant seeking the cancellation of pre-arrest bail granted to the respondent by the Special Judge Central, Multan, in a case registered under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question concerned the legality and propriety of the bail-granting order, which the petitioner alleged was non-speaking and based on grounds alien to the law. The Lahore High Court observed that the lower court had decided the pre-arrest bail petition in a slipshod manner, albeit under strict time constraints previously imposed by the High Court. Consequently, the court disposed of the petition by setting aside the matter and directing the petitioner to re-approach the Special Judge Central for a fresh decision through a reasoned, speaking order after examining the entire record. Additionally, the court granted the respondent protective bail for seven days to enable him to surrender before the lower court.
- Whether a pre-arrest bail order passed in a slipshod manner without being a speaking order is sustainable?
- Can the High Court grant protective bail to enable an accused to approach the trial court afresh?
- Whether a bail petition decided under strict time constraints without examining the entire record warrants a remand for a fresh decision?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Haji Muhammad Munir complainant of case FIR No, 279/2008 dated 3.7.2008 under Sections 420/468/471 PPC registered at Police Station City Mian Channu, District Khanewal seeks cancellation of bail allowed to Ameer Abdullah/respondent by learned Special Judge Central Multan vide order dated 20.9.2008.
2. It is, inter-alia contended that respondent is named in the FIR with attribution of specific role; that respondent committed fraud with the complainant/petitioner and caused loss to him of the amount to the tune of Rs, 4,25,000/-; that there is no elements of malic or mala fide even mentioned in the impugned order; that the learned Court below proceeded to allow bail to respondent/accused on ground alien to law; that the impugned order is not speaking order.
3. Conversely, Rana Muhammad Asif Saeed Advocate counsel for respondent/accused submits that the complainant also got registered another case regarding the same occurrence bearing FIR No, 239 dated 13.11.2005 with FIA Crimes Circle, Multan; that petitioner joined the investigation and a report for cancellation of the FIR was prepared; that the report of discharge was approved by the learned Special Judge Central; that present FIR has been lodged-by suppressing the substantial facts; that complainant also assailed intermediately orders passed by learned Special Judge Central, Multan, before this. Court through Writ Petition No 4306/2008.
4. During the course of arguments, I have noticed with concern that the learned Special Judge Central Multan proceeded to decide the petition seeking pre-arrest bail filed by respondent/accused in a slipshod manners. Minute examination of the record, however reveals- that learned Special Judge Central.was left with no option but to decide the same either way in view of order passed by this Court wherein a period of 15 days had been prescribed for deciding the bail petition. This petition is therefore disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to re- approach the learned Special Judge Central, Multan for the grant of pre-arrest bail, who shall pass a speaking order, after examining the entire record and providing opportunity to all parties concerned including the accused as well as the complainant. At this stage, Rana Muhammad Asif Saeed, Advocate learned counsel for the accused submits that he may be allowed protective bail enabling him to approach the learned Special Judge Central, Multan. Therefore, the respondent is admitted to protective bail for a period of seven days subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/- (one lac) to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge Central, Multan. The learned Special Judge Central is expected to decide the bail petition expeditiously .preferably within a period of sixty days from the receipt of this order.
5. With these observations, this petition stands disposed of.