ZAWAR HUSSAIN vs THE STATE and another
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 2 of 2008 dated 2-1-2008 registered under sections 337-F(v), 337-F(i), 452, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station City Alipur, District Muzaffargarh. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail when nominated in the F.I.R. with a specific role, considering the nature of the injuries attributed to him and the period already spent behind bars. The Lahore High Court held that since most injuries were declared Ghair Jaifa Khafifa, the offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and the petitioner had been in custody for a considerable period without substantial progress in the trial, the bail petition should be accepted. The key principle laid down is that where offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause and the accused has suffered prolonged incarceration without trial progress, bail is granted as a matter of rule.
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when the charged offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does prolonged incarceration without substantial progress in the trial constitute a ground for the grant of bail?
- What is the legal effect on a bail petition when injuries attributed to the accused are classified as Ghair Jaifa Khafifa and fall outside the prohibitory clause?
- Section 337-F(v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
'MALIK SAEED EJAZ, J.---Petitioner (Zawar Hussain) seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,2/2008 dated 2-1-2008 under sections 337-F(v), 337-F(i), 452,34, P.P.C. P.S City, Alipur, District Muzaffargarh.
2 . Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with co-accused went to the house of the complainant and caused injuries to Mst. Amir Mai mother of the complainant with butt of his gun, while standing outside the house of the complainant.
3. Learned counsel contends that petitioner has been falsely involved in the case and that even otherwise, the injuries sustained by Mst. Amir Mai have been declared Ghair Jaifa Khafifa and only one injury is Jurrah Munaqila. It is lastly argued that petitioner is behind the bars since 16-12-2008 and the offences do not fall within prohibitory clause.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application on the ground that petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. With a specific role.
'Heard. Record perused.
6. No doubt the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. But except one injury, all the other have been declared Ghair Jaifa Khafifa. The offences with which the petitioner is being charged do not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., whereas, petitioner is A languishing in jail since 16- 12-2008, without any substantial progress in the trial. In these circumstances, I am inclined to allow this petition, as such, petitioner is admitted to bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD RAZA ELAHI Versus State 2017 YLRN 203