BAKHSH SHAH vs The STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by a government contractor accused of offences under sections 406, 409, 420, and 427 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following the cancellation of his earlier conditional bail by the trial court. The petitioner sought release on bail before the Gilgit Baltistan Chief Court, challenging the trial court's order of December 14, 2015, which had revoked his conditional bail due to alleged non-compliance. The core legal question was whether the High Court should entertain a bail petition when the specific grounds raised therein had not been previously agitated before the trial court. The Court held that the petition was premature and procedurally improper because the petitioner had failed to exhaust the available legal remedies at the trial court level regarding the specific grounds now presented. Consequently, the Court rejected the petition, establishing the principle that a superior court will not entertain a bail petition where the petitioner has bypassed the trial court by failing to first agitate the grounds for relief before that forum.
- Can a petitioner file a bail petition in a superior court without first agitating the specific grounds before the trial court?
- Is it permissible for a court to entertain a bail application when the petitioner has failed to exhaust the remedy of seeking bail on the same grounds before the trial court?
- Section 406, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 427, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
MUHAMMAD ALAM, J.---This is a bail petition for grant of bail facility to the petitioner in connection with occurrence reported through FIR No, 08/2015 of Police Station Goner Farm.
2. Petitioner, who is involved for the offence of sections 406, 409, 420 and 427, P.P.C., booked through FIR No, 08/2015 dated 21-04-2015 of Police Station Goner Farm, seeks his release on bail through this petition.
3. Petitioner, who is a Government Contractor, was awarded the contract of the project of construction of a building of Ad hoc Primary School Goner Farm. On report of the FIR lodger, police concerned chalked FIR on 14-12-2015, although the occurrence took place on 11-06-2009 and arrested petitioner. But the learned trial Court directed for release of the petitioner, subject to some conditions, including deposit of Rs, 500,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousand) cash in the account of trial Court as security. Later on, the trial Court cancelled the bail facility holding that:- "S.No. Dated Order
1. 14-12-2015 DPP Mr. Abdul Sadiq for the state present.
Accused on bail present. Accused has violated the conditional bail order dated 2109-2015 passed in bail application No,43/2015 therefore conditional bail order dated 21-09-2015 is hereby withdrawn. Accused is taken into custody. He be sent to judicial.
Notice to the complainant for 15- 12-2015,"
4. Learned counsel for petitioner stated at bar that they have filed this petition feeling aggrieved from order dated 14-12-2015 of the learned trial Court. It is also not disputed that, prior to the said order, learned trial Court passed another order dated 21-09-2015 on bail petition No, 43/2015, whereby granted bail facility to the petitioner on the conditions embodied in the said order.
Learned counsel for petitioner did not file copy of said order of grant of conditional bail, found referred in order dated 14-12-2015. The learned counsel for petitioner further stated at bar that they did not file any petition for grant of bail before the learned trial Court, on the grounds agitated through this petition. So, it is admitted and evident that petitioner did not exhaust the grounds of bail agitated through this petition before the learned trial Court. This trend is not only new and novel but is bad in the eye of law, therefore, cannot be encouraged.
5. I therefore, reject this petition and hold that petitioner is free to file a fresh bail petition on the grounds agitated through this petition, before the learned trial Court or resort to any other remedy against the order dated 14-12-2015 of the trial Court, if, in the opinion of the petitioner, the said order (Order dated 14-12-2015) is violative of conditional bail grant order dated 21-9-2015, passed in bail petition No,43 of 2015. This file be consigned to record.