MANZOOR AHMAD and others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioners in relation to F.I.R. No. 427 registered under sections 506, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the allegations of threats, as described in the F.I.R., constituted the offence of criminal intimidation under section 506, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, and whether the petitioners were entitled to pre-arrest bail. The Court held that the allegations of a 'simpliciter threat' did not satisfy the definition of criminal intimidation provided in section 503, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, as there was no evidence that the threats were intended to compel the complainant to perform or omit any act. The Court observed that the registration of the case appeared to be motivated by mala fides, particularly given the absence of weapons and the statements of police officials present at the scene. Consequently, the Court confirmed the pre-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that threats simpliciter, without the intent to cause the victim to act or omit an act as defined in section 503, do not constitute criminal intimidation under section 506, Pakistan Penal Code 1860.
- Does a mere threat, without the intent to compel an act or omission, constitute criminal intimidation under section 506 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- What are the essential ingredients of criminal intimidation as defined under section 503 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Can the registration of a criminal case be considered mala fide if the allegations in the F.I.R. do not constitute the offence charged?
- Section 506, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 503, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, J.---Manzoor Ahmad, Safdar Hussain alias Makhan and Ghulam Haider petitioners seek bail before arrest in case F.l.R. No. 427, dated 2-8-2099 registered under sections .506/1481149, . P.P.C. At Police . Station Shedani District Rahimyar Khan.
2. Briefly the prosecution story mentioned in the F.l.R. Is that on 29- 7-2009 complainant went to.
The Police Post Khanbela where many persons of different brotherly were present and at about 12- 10 a.m. (noon) Ghulam Haider, Manzoor Ahmad and Makhni petitioners along with 8 others persons started altercation with the complainant and also abused him and threatened for murder.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that a case F.l.R. No. 417 of 2009 under sections 452/148/149, P.P.C. Was registered at Police Station Shedani District Rahimyar Khan at the instance of the nephew of the petitioners. In order to counterblast and put pressure upon the petitioners, this false case was registered against them with mala fide. Intention and with ulterior motives; that simpliciter threat does not constitute an offence under section 506, P.P,C. And registration of case under section 506, P.P.C. Manifest a mala fide and ulterior motive on the part of the complainant and the police .
4: Learned DPG for the State opposed the grant of bail.
5. Heard_. Record perused.
6. Simpliciter threat does not constitute. An offence under section 506, P.P.C. And definition of criminal intimidation is given in . Section 503, P. P. C. Which is reproduced as under- "Whoever threatens another With an injury to his person, . Reputation or property, or' to the person or reputation of any one in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he Is not legally bound to. Do, or to omit. To do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, 'as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat, commits criminal intimidation."
' The definition of criminal intimidation in section 503, P.P .C. Made it clear that threats simpliciter are not sufficient to constitute a criminal intimidation within the definition of section 503, P. P. C., unless it is eaused that person to do any .Act who is not legally bound to do or to omit to do any action which that person was 'legally hound to do.
' The petitioners are not shown to be armed with any weapon. Although. The. Allegations levelied in the F.l.R. Did not constitute the offence punishable under section 506, P.P.C. As mentioned above, yet . Police registered the case under this section obviously to arrest them Which indicates mala fides on the part of the police and the complainant.
' According to the complainant, this 'occurrence took place at police post where other police officials were also present. Investigating Officer Had recorded the statements of the police officials during investigation and according to them, only altercation took place and no threats. Were given to the complainant.
' As in this case nothing is ~o be recovered by the police from the, petitioners; hence reform them bail especially when offence is not made out from the bare reading of the F.1.R. Will not serve any useful purpose.
7. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the pre-arrest bail already ranted the petitioners is confirmed subject' to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rs, One Jae only) each with one surely each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Illaqa Magistrate.
Any observation made by this Court on the merits of the case will not prejudice the case of either party during the trial.
Cited by 2 cases
- Jamshaid Ahmad vs The State, etc 2021 LHC 3283, 2022 P Cr.LJ 1254
- JAMSHAID AHMAD Versus State 2022 PCrLJ 1254