Pakistan Case Law
2016 SCMR 1415

RAMZAN and others vs The STATE and others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2016 SCMR 1415
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Crl. P. No, 386-L of 2016
Date2016-05-16
Judge(s)Umar Ata Bandial and Manzoor Ahmad Malik
Authored byManzoor Ahmad Malik
ResultBail granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioners in relation to FIR No. 597/2015, registered under sections 440, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving allegations of land encroachment, assault, and criminal intimidation. The core legal question was whether, given the circumstances of the case, the petitioners were entitled to the grant of pre-arrest bail. Upon review, the Supreme Court observed a significant delay of over five months in lodging the FIR, the absence of a Medical Legal Report (MLR) to substantiate the alleged assault, the lack of specific roles attributed to the petitioners, and the prima facie civil nature of the underlying land dispute. The Court held that these factors indicated potential mala fide intent on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioners. Consequently, the Court allowed the petition, converted it into an appeal, and granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioners, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds, establishing that unexplained delay and lack of corroborative evidence in criminal complaints involving civil disputes justify pre-arrest bail.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does a significant, unexplained delay in lodging an FIR constitute grounds for the grant of pre-arrest bail?
  • Can pre-arrest bail be granted when the underlying dispute appears to be of a civil nature rather than criminal?
  • Is the absence of a Medical Legal Report (MLR) a relevant factor in determining the entitlement to pre-arrest bail in cases of alleged assault?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 440, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
pre-arrest bailmala fideland disputecriminal intimidationdelay in FIRcivil nature of dispute

ORDER

' MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case FIR No, 597/2015 dated 11.12.2015, offence under sections 440, 148 and 149, P.P.C., registered at P.S. Peer Mehal, District Toba Tek Singh.

2. Precise allegation against the petitioners, as contained in the FIR is that on 05.07.2015 at about 5.00 a.m. In the morning, the petitioners along with their co-accused, after consultation, included some land of the complainant into their own land; that when the complainant tried to forbid them from doing so, the petitioners armed with different weapons belabored him and threatened to kill him.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondent No,2/caveat, learned Additional Prosecutor General Punjab and perusing the material available on record, we have noticed that there is a delay of more than five months in lodging the FIR; that there is no mention of the application which purportedly was filed by the complainant before the Revenue Department before the lodging of FIR; that the complainant has alleged in the FIR that present petitioners along with their co-accused gave severe beating to him, but there is no MLR available on record to show that the complainant got injured during the incident, that no specific role has been attributed to the petitioners in the FIR and that prima facie the dispute qua the land appears to be more of civil in nature than criminal. In these circumstances, mala fide on the part of the complainant for false implication of the petitioners cannot be ruled out.

4. For what has been discussed above, this petition is converted into appeal and the same is allowed. Conselluently, petitioners namely Ramzan, Chiragh and Razzaq are allowed bail before arrest in the instant FIR, subject to furnishing their bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/-(rupees one lac only) each, with one surety each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.