MUHAMMAD ISHAQ vs THE STATE and others
This matter arises from a criminal petition for leave to appeal seeking pre-arrest bail in respect of an F.I.R. registered for house trespass and causing injuries. The petitioner was denied pre-arrest bail by the High Court because section 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was added, despite the sole injury attributed to him being bailable. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail where the injury attributed was bailable and the applicability of the penal section remained a moot point between investigating authorities. The Supreme Court converted the petition into an appeal and allowed it, holding that the possibility of false involvement for mala fide reasons could not be ruled out given the bailable nature of the primary injury and conflicting views of the investigating officers. The key principle laid down is that where the primary injury attributed to an accused is bailable and the application of a heavier penal provision remains disputed among police officers, a case for pre-arrest bail is made out due to the possibility of mala fide involvement.
- Is an accused entitled to pre-arrest bail when the sole injury attributed to him attracts a bailable offence?
- Does a disagreement between investigating officers regarding the applicability of a section justify granting pre-arrest bail?
- Can the possibility of false involvement for mala fide reasons be a ground for granting pre-arrest bail?
- Section 452, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.---Petitioner along with six others have been proceeded against in terms of the case registered vide F.I.R. No,184 of 2011 dated 20-4-2001, Police Station Sillanwali, District Sargodha, wherein it was alleged that on the fateful day of crime he along with others trespassed on the complainant's house and injured the complainant party. The co-accused of the petitioner was allowed pre-arrest bail by the learned High Court but the said relief was denied to the petitioner on the ground that though the injury attributed to him is Shujah Khafifa, which is boilable but section 452, Cr.P.C. Was also added in the F.I.R. And no case for bail was made out.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail on the ground that the prosecution is motivated by malice; that the Investigating Officer found the petitioner to be empty handed at the time of occurrence and not caused any injury and section 452, Cr.P.C. Was not liable to be attributed to the petitioner. Learned Additional Prosecutor-General, Punjab submitted that though the investigating officer did give the fore referred finding, yet the concerned DSP has disagreed with the Investigating Officer so for as the application of section 452, Cr.P.C. Is concerned. Learned counsel for the complainant opposed the petition as according to him petitioner along with others trespassed to the complainant's house and caused him injures and no case for pre-arrest bail is made out.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, we find that admittedly the sole injury attributed to the petitioner in terms of F.I.R. Is not only Shujah Khafifa making the offence boilable but even if the I.O. Found that petitioner was empty handed and the said finding has not been varied so. The question of application of section 452, Cr.P.C. Remains a moot point between the two officers i,e, the Investigating Officer and the DSP.
4. In view of the afore-referred findings of the Investigating Officer and the fact that the sole injury attributed attracts only boilable offence, the possibility of petitioner's false involvement for mala fide reasons cannot be ruled out. That being so, this petition is converted into appeal and allowed and, resultantly, the petitioner is admitted to pre-arrest bail, subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. He shall remain on pre-arrest bail.
Pre-arrest .
Cited by 3 cases
- MUHAMMAD IRSHAD Versus State 2026 SCMR 1286
- Muhammad Zameer and another vs The State and another 2022 MLD 1059
- Gen. (R) PERVEZ MUSHARRAF Versus State 2013 PLD 66