ABDUR REHMAN vs SADAQAT and anothers
The petitioner, Abdur Rehman, sought post-arrest bail after being refused by the lower courts in case F.I.R. No. 162 registered under sections 382 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Bhannamari Peshawar. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who was allegedly caught red-handed at the spot along with co-accused during the commission of a robbery involving the snatching of a mobile phone and cash, was entitled to the concession of bail on the ground of further inquiry. The Peshawar High Court held that the petitioner was prima facie connected with the offense falling within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, having been caught red-handed without any mala fide or personal ill-will shown on the part of the complainant. The court laid down the principle that an accused caught red-handed at the crime scene in a heinous offense falling under the prohibitory clause, with no apparent mala fide from the complainant, is not entitled to post-arrest bail. Consequently, the bail petition was dismissed.
- Is an accused caught red-handed at the spot of a robbery entitled to post-arrest bail on the ground of further inquiry?
- Does an offense under section 382 read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Whether the absence of recovery from the personal possession of an accused caught at the scene warrants the grant of bail?
- Section 382, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' MIFTAH-UD-DIN KHAN, J.---Petitioner Abdur Rehman has been refused bail by the Courts below in case F.I.R. No,162 dated 14-2-2012 of Police Station, Bhannamari Peshawar registered under section 382/34, P.P.C., therefore, he has moved the present petition.
2. The brief facts of the case are that complainant Sadaqat on 14-2-2012 made a report to the effect that on the day of occurrence he along with his family members on return from Swat reached near Wakho Pull at 11.30 hours, four persons emerged out of whom one took out his Pistol and snatched away a Mobile Set from him while his other fellow snatched Rs,40,000 from his pocket who was overpowered and in the meanwhile other companions armed with Pistol fired at the complainant upon which people of the locality attracted to the spot and arrested the armed person and petitioner while two other persons escaped from the spot that one .30 bore Pistol along with one empty and four cartridges and one snatched Mobile Set was recovered from accused Raees while other accused disclosed his name as Abdur Rehman the present petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was not armed at the relevant time and no recovery has been effected from him, therefore, case of the petitioner is of further inquiry, hence he is entitled to the concession of bail.
4. Learned State Counsel opposed the bail petition on the ground that the petitioner along with his co-accused were caught red handed along with weapon used in the commission of offence, hence prima facie the petitioner is connected with an offence recovered by the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, I have come to the conclusion that the petitioner along with co-accused were caught red-handed from the spot while snatching Mobile Set and cash amount from complainant. Record further indicates that the petitioner along with his other co-accused in furtherance of their common intention duly armed after making preparation for causing hurt and wrongful restraint are prima facie connected with offence of snatching away Mobile and cash amount from the complainant Sadaqat who has got no personal ill will or mala fide against petitioner, therefore, no reason and justified grounds exist to extend concession of bail to the petitioner.
6. Resultantly, this bail petition is dismissed.