Dr. NASIR ALI MALIK vs The STATE and another
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a petition filed by Dr. Nasir Ali Malik seeking post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 05/2011 dated 9-7-2011 registered under Section 409 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 at Police Station ACE, District Mianwali, relating to the alleged misappropriation of medicines during his tenure as District Officer Health. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail on merits and on the basis of the rule of consistency, given that co-accused facing similar allegations have already been enlarged on bail and that the prosecution has not shown direct entrustment of medicines to him. The court held that since co-accused with identical roles had been granted bail and the petitioner was no longer required for further investigation, he was entitled to the same relief. The key principle laid down is that the rule of consistency dictates that an accused person whose role is at par with co-accused already released on bail ought similarly to be admitted to bail.
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail on the basis of the rule of consistency when co-accused with similar roles have already been enlarged on bail?
- Whether the absence of material evidence regarding the entrustment of property to a public servant warrants the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Does the completion of investigation and the fact that an accused is no longer required for further investigation support the grant of bail?
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
ORDER
' FARRUKH GULZAR AWAN, J.--Through the instant petition, Dr. Nasir Ali Malik petitioner has sought post arrest bail in case FIR No,05/2011 dated 9-7-2011 offence under section 409, P.P.C., 5(2) 47 PCA registered at Police Station ACE, District Mianwali in which it is alleged that the petitioner was posted as DOH in Mianwali in year 2006-07 when he along with his co-accused misappropriated the medicines and this case was lodged after departmental inquiry.
2. Arguments heard. Record perused.
3. The petitioner was doing his job as DOH and he was not entrusted any sort of medicine. The prosecution has not collected any material evidence regarding the entrustment of medicine to the petitioner. During second inquiry held on 1-10-2010, three P.Ws. Namely Raza, Rafi Ullah and Azhar Qayum have not supported the prosecution version to the extent of the petitioner. Co-accused Abdul Rehman Khan who was serving as store keeper was enlarged on bail in this case vide order dated 27-3-2013 passed in Crl. Misc. No,3276-B of 2013. Co-accused namely Zafar Ullah, Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Imran, Ihsan Ullah and Ghulam Mustafa having the same role have been enlarged on bail by the learned trial court. The role of present petitioner is that at par with the co-accused who have already been admitted to post arrest bail by the learned trial court as well as by this Court, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail on the basis of rule of consistency and this fact alone tilts the scale of justice in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is no more required for further investigation.
' In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to