Azhar Ali Shah vs The State
This matter arises from a second post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner after his first application was dismissed as withdrawn following full arguments. The core legal question concerns the entitlement to post-arrest bail of an accused who is nominated in the first information report, absconded, and was declared a fugitive from law before being subsequently arrested. The Lahore High Court held that a fugitive from law loses normal procedural and substantive rights, and finding no further circumstances warranting probe into the guilt of the petitioner—who allegedly issued a dishonoured cheque—dismissed the petition in limine. The key principle laid down is that a person who avoids the process of law and turns fugitive exposes themselves to a position of disadvantage and forfeits certain normal rights under the law.
- Does a fugitive from law lose normal rights under substantive and procedural law?
- Can a second post-arrest bail application be maintained after the first one is argued at length and dismissed as withdrawn?
- Whether an accused who absconded after being nominated in the FIR is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 87, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J. - This is the second post arrest bail application of the petitioner, first having been dismissed as withdrawn on 15.11.2010 after it had been argued at full length.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case, the charge is groundless and offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Further submits that the petitioner was arrested on 2.10.2010 challan under Section 173, Cr.P.C. Stands submitted, before the Court concerned and he is no more required for further investigation.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the available record.
4. The first post arrest bail application of the petitioner (Crl. Misc. No. 1899-B/2010) was dismissed as withdrawn but not before the learned counsel for the petitioner had argued the same at full length and had sensed its outcome'. The petitioner was nominated as an accused of this case by the complainant on 18.11.2008 whereafter he skipped and turned fugitive from law. He was arrested on 2.10.2010 and in the meanwhile, process under Section 87, Cr.P.C. Stood completed against him.
5. A person who does not believe in the process and commandment of law exposes himself to a position of deprivation and disadvantageousness. It has been held time and again that a fugitive from law loses some of his normal rights not only under the substantive law but also under the procedural law. I do not find any circumstance warranting further probe into the guilt of the petitioner, who is named in the F.I.R. With the allegation to have dishonestly issued a cheque of 20,00,000/- (two millions),to the complainant knowingly that it would be dishonoured" on presentation and this is what exactly happened Subsequent thereto, the instant petition is dismissed in limine, being destitute of merits.