Rehmat Ullah, etc vs The State
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a petition filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, whereby the petitioners, Rehmat Ullah and Khalid, sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 67/15 registered under Sections 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), 147, 149, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Saddar, District Sargodha. The core legal question involved whether the petitioners were entitled to post-arrest bail given that the offences attributed to them did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and the normal punishment for hurt involves Arsh or Daman. The court held that since the offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause, the petitioners had no previous criminal record, and further incarceration would serve no useful purpose, the petition should be allowed. The key principle laid down is that bail should generally be granted in non-prohibitory offences where the accused are not previous convicts and further detention serves no purpose.
- Whether post-arrest bail should be granted when the offences charged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the normal punishment of Arsh or Daman for hurt cases influence the grant of bail when the accused is not a previous convict?
- Is the submission of a challan in court a sufficient ground to disentitle an accused from the grant of bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-N(2), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' ERUM SAJAD GULL, J. --- Through this petition under Section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioners Rehmat Ullah son of Qadir Bakhsh and Khalid son of Ashraf have sought bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No. 67/15, dated 14.02.2015 under Sections 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), 147, 149, 34, P.P.C. Police Station Saddar, District Sargodha.
2. Briefly stated the allegations against the petitioners as per F.I.R. Are that petitioner No. 1 Rehmat Ullah while armed with Sota hit Noor Muhammad, injured (father of the complainant), on his left arm. And petitioner No. 2 Khalid while armed with Sota inflicted a blow on the right arm of Noor Muhammad, injured (father of the complainant).
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. The injuries attributed to both the petitioners were declared under Section 337-F(v), P.P.C., the punishment whereof is five years, which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. As per the Police Official present in Court, four co-accused namely Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Qasim, Muhammad Riaz and Safdar have been granted bail by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Sargodha. "Provision of Section 337-N(2) contemplates that in all cases of hurt the normal punishment to be awarded to an offender is payment of Arsh or Daman and the optional additional punishment of imprisonment provided for the relevant offence can be awarded to an offender only where the offender is a previous convict, habitual or hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal." Reliance is placed on Ali Muhammad v. The State (PLD 2009 Lahore 312). There is no other case registered against the present petitioners. The petitioners are behind the bars since the day of their arrest, as they are no more needed in police investigation, hence their incarceration will serve no useful purpose. Though the challan has been submitted in the Court but this is no ground to disentitle the petitioners for grant of hail. Reliance is placed upon "Mst. Maria Khan v. The State another (2013 SCMR 49)." In the countries following tilt common Law, the principle that a person is innocent till guilty is strictly applied.
5. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the petitioners are granted bail after arrest subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
6. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.