KHALID MEHMOOD and others vs THE STATE and others
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan through a petition for leave to appeal seeking pre-arrest bail in respect of a criminal case registered via First Information Report No. 86 of 2011 at Police Station Rinala Khurd. The core legal question concerns the entitlement of the petitioners to pre-arrest bail where they explicitly disclaim possession of the disputed property and have fully cooperated with the investigating agency. The court converted the petition into an appeal and allowed it, granting pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. The key principle laid down is that where accused persons do not claim possession of the subject matter of the crime and nothing remains to be recovered from them following their participation in the investigation, they are entitled to be admitted to bail.
- Are accused persons entitled to pre-arrest bail when they disclaim possession of the subject matter of the crime?
- Does joining the investigation and the absence of any further recovery justify granting bail to the petitioners?
' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---On Court query, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners do not claim possession of the shop/subject matter of the case, registered vide F.I.R.
No,86 of 2011 Police Station Rinala Khurd in which pre-arrest bail is sought and the case has been registered on account of some misunderstanding.
2. Learned Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab states that although the allegation of breaking the lock of the shop is admitted but since petitioners do not claim possession, the investigation agency shall proceed accordingly. He does not deny that the petitioners had joined the investigation and nothing is to be recovered from them*.
3. In view of the above, as petitioners do not claim possession of the shop/subject matter of the F.I.R. And nothing is to be recovered from them, this petition is converted into appeal and the same is allowed and, resultantly, the petitioners are admitted to bail, subject to their furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand only) with one surety each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 2 cases
- Bilal Anwar vs State and another PLJ 2020 Cr.C. (Lahore) 505
- ZULFIQAR ALI Versus State 2017 YLRN 84