Muhammad Boota And 5 Other vs The State
This petition seeks pre-arrest bail in respect of FIR No. 345/2009 registered under Sections 447, 379, 147, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Shakargarh, District Narowal, involving allegations of timber theft. The core legal question concerns the justification for confirming pre-arrest bail where a property dispute exists regarding the land where the trees were allegedly cut. The Lahore High Court held that since the investigation was almost complete, the petitioners were no longer required for investigative purposes, and no incriminating articles were recovered from them during the investigation, the ad interim pre-arrest bail should be confirmed. The key principle laid down is that pre-arrest bail may be confirmed when investigation concludes without the recovery of incriminating material and the necessity for custodial interrogation no longer exists, particularly in matters involving civil property disputes.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be confirmed when investigation is complete and no incriminating articles are recovered?
- Does a dispute regarding ownership of the land where trees were allegedly cut justify the confirmation of pre-arrest bail?
- Section 447, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J. - Through this petition prayer has been made for pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No 345/2009, dated 23.7.2009 for the offence under Sections 447/379/147/149, P.P.C.
Registered at Police Station Shakargarh, District Narowal.
2. Precise-allegation against the petitioners is that they had stolen timber. The stand taken up by learned counsel for the petitioners is that the land from where the trees were allegedly cut down belongs to the petitioners whereas the contrary stand has been taken by learned counsel for the complainant.
Learned law officer under instructions submits that investigation in this case is almost complete, petitioners are no more required for the said purpose and during investigation no Incriminating article was recovered from the petitioner. In this view of the matter, this petition is allowed and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners vide order dated 27.8.2009 stands confirmed against the same surety bonds.