MUHAMMAD USMAN vs THE STATE and another
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a petition seeking pre-arrest bail in respect of F.I.R. No. 79 of 2010 registered under Section 379 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Dalwaryam, District Pakpattan, concerning the theft and illegal cutting of trees belonging to the Forest Department. The core legal question is whether pre-arrest bail can be confirmed when the accused is nominated with a specific role, caught at the spot, and has admitted to the commission of the offence while depositing compensation for the loss. The court held that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief which cannot be extended to an accused who is nominated with a specific role and has admitted to committing theft. The court laid down the principle that the payment of compensation or making good the financial loss to the complainant does not automatically entitle an accused involved in a heinous crime like theft to the extraordinary concession of pre-arrest bail, particularly when guilt is admitted.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted to an accused who is nominated in the F.I.R. with a specific role and admits to the commission of the offence?
- Does the payment of compensation to the Forest Department for illegally cut timber entitle an accused to confirmation of pre-arrest bail under Section 379 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ, J.--- Through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks his pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,79 of 2010 dated 4-6-2010, for the offences under section 379, P.P.C., registered with Police Station Dalwaryam, Tehsil and District Pakpattan.
2. The precise allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed the theft and cut trees from the forest owned by the Forest Department and wood valuing Rs.75,550 was also recovered from the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that although the petitioner is guilty of illegal, cutting of trees from the forest but he has paid the compensation of wood to the Forest Department, therefore, he has made good the loss of Forest Department and have redressed the grievance of the complainant, therefore, ad interim bail granted to the petitioner be confirmed.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General Punjab has vehemently opposed this bail application.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. The petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. With specific role that he has committed the theft of trees owned by the Forest Department by cutting the same who was caught and wood amounting to Rs.75,550 was recovered from his possession. Further, the allegation of theft is corroborated by the admission of the petitioner that he has committed the offence and deposited the compensation on account of loss caused to the Forest Department. The petitioner 's accused under section 379, P.P.C. Which is a heinous crime. The bail before arrest is an extraordinary relief which cannot be extended to a thief particularly when he himself has admitted that he has committed the offence.
In the circumstances, the ad interim bail before arrest granted to the petitioner vide order dated 16-7-2010 is recalled