Jannat Gul vs The State and another
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a petition filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, whereby the petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 785/15 dated 04.07.2015 registered under Sections 381-A and 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Murree, Rawalpindi. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail when the offense does not fall within the prohibitory clause and the recovery requires further inquiry. The court held that since the occurrence was unseen, the recovery at best attracts Section 411 PPC carrying a sentence of up to three years, the offenses do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C., the investigation is complete, and the petitioner is a previous non-convict, the case calls for further inquiry under Section 497(2) Cr.P.C. Consequently, the petition was allowed and the petitioner was admitted to bail. The key principle laid down is that in offenses not falling within the prohibitory clause, grant of bail is a rule and refusal is an exception, especially when further inquiry into the petitioner's guilt is warranted.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when the offenses charged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the recovery of a vehicle from the accused alone attract Section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 warranting further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the investigation is complete, the accused is no longer required for investigative purposes, and is a previous non-convict?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 381-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
Through this petition under section 497 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.785/15, dated 04.07.2015 under sections 381-A, 41 1 PPC, Police Station Murree, Rawalpindi.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and only tentative assessment is required at this stage. It has been noticed that the occurrence reported through the aforementioned FIR was unseen as nobody has seen the accused stealing the vehicle in question. Admittedly there is no evidence against the petitioner that he is instrumental in taking away the vehicle and as far as the contention of learned Deputy Prosecutor General that the vehicle was taken into custody from the possession of the petitioner is concerned, I may observe here that the recovery of vehicle from the petitioner at the most attracts the provisions of section 411 PPC which carries maximum punishment upto three years. Even otherwise, the worth and evidentiary value of the recovery of vehicle would be seen by the learned trial court after recording evidence in this case. As far as the attraction of section 381-A PPC to the extent of present petitioner is concerned, the same shall be determined by the learned trial court after recording evidence. Even otherwise, the offences with which the petitioner is being charged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. In such like cases, grant of bail is a rule, while its refusal is an exception. Reliance can be placed on PLD 1995 SC 34. Admittedly the petitioner is previously non-convict, investigation of this case qua the petitioner is complete, he is behind the bars since 18.08.2015; his person is not required for the purpose of further investigation, therefore, his continuous incarceration in jail would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of sub-section (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
4. The observations made hereinabo ve are just tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the disposal of instant bail application only .