MUHAMMAD NASIR vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the accused, Muhammad Nasir, who was charged with the possession of stolen property following an incident where gold ornaments and other household items were reported stolen. The core legal question before the High Court was whether the accused was entitled to the grant of post-arrest bail given the nature of the offence and the status of the investigation. The Court observed that the primary allegation against the applicant fell under Section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which carries a maximum imprisonment of three years. Furthermore, the Court noted that the trial was not likely to conclude in the near future. Holding that the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 was not attracted in this case, the Court granted bail to the applicant. The key principle laid down is that where an offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of the relevant bail statute and the trial is not imminent, the accused is generally entitled to the grant of bail upon furnishing satisfactory surety.
- Is an offence under Section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 covered by the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the delay in the conclusion of a trial justify the grant of bail to an accused charged with possession of stolen property?
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 550, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
MUHAMMAD SADIQ LAGHARI, J.--- On 4-1-2006 Quaid Johar of New Challi Aram Bagh lodged report with Methadar police stating that during night intervening of 2nd and 3rd February, 2006 gold ornaments, one VCR, cell phone, watch and driving licence had been stolen away from his house.
2. The case was registered as F.I.R. No,45 of 2006 and then passed on to the investigation wing.
Inspector Irshad Ahmed Sodai took up the investigation. According to the record he arrested applicant Muhammad Nasir on 4-2-2006 and interrogated him. It is said that during the interrogation the applicant led the police and produced the stolen articles and some other articles claiming them to have been gathered by him during some other criminal activities. The remaining articles were seized under section 550, Cr.P.C.
3. The Investigating Officer is present today. He stated that those remaining articles are still available and have not been identified as the property of any case.
4. Heard arguments. The allegations against the applicant is of only possessing of the stolen articles which offence falls under section 411, P.P.C. And punishable with imprison for three years.
The embargo put by section 497, Cr.P.C. Is not attracted. The conclusion of the trial is also not within sight. To him. He shall be released on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 1 case
- Sindhj FAYAZ HUSSAIN vs THE STATE 2012 P Cr. L J 1794