KAMRAN KHAN and another vs The STATE and another
The petitioners sought post-arrest bail after being apprehended with a substantial cache of arms and ammunition, including multiple pistols, rifles, and thousands of rounds of ammunition, during a police operation. The petitioners argued that the consignment was being transported under a valid license issued to a third party, and contended that because the minimum sentence for the alleged offences was five years, their case fell outside the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The Court rejected these arguments, noting that the licensee had not come forward to claim the consignment and that the facts of the cited precedents were distinguishable. The Court held that even where an offence is punishable by less than ten years, the Court retains discretion to decline bail based on the nature of the accusation and supporting material. Given the massive volume and lethality of the recovered arms, the Court dismissed the bail petition, finding no grounds for relief at the stage of tentative assessment.
- Does the existence of a minimum sentence of less than ten years for an offence automatically entitle an accused to bail under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
- Can a court decline discretionary bail even if an offence is punishable by less than ten years imprisonment?
- Is the plea of a valid license for transporting a large cache of weapons a sufficient ground for bail at the stage of tentative assessment when the licensee has not come forward?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.---Surprised by police contingent, in the wake of a tip-off, the petitioners were found with a huge cache of arms and ammunition in their vehicle at Faisalabad Road within the precincts of Police Station Rajoa Chiniot. The consignment comprised of the following:--
1. 16 pistols .30-bore with 24 magazines & 19000 bullets
2. Kalashnikov with two magazine
3. One Repeater with four magazines
4. One rifle with 300 bullets
5. One rifle 44-caliber with 14 magazines and 400 bullets
6. 4 Rifles .222-bore with 10 magazines and 2100 bullets
7. 3200 bullets of 9-mm
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Argument that the weapons and ammunition were being transported under a valid licence issued to one Rana Kalim Arshad is beside the mark, as the said licensee never came forward to lay forth any claim and so is reliance by the learned counsel on the cases titled as Saif Ullah v. The State (1994 PCr.LJ 2340), Sheroz and another v. The State (2006 YLR 3167), Muhammad Sharif v. The State and another (2014 PCr.LJ 97), Abid alias Abbi Arain v. The State (2016 PCr.LJ note 109), Abdul Latif v. The State (2016 PCr.LJ note 122) to argue that the petitioners may possibly be sentenced to imprisonment for five years as B minimum sentence provided under the Statute and as such, their case was not covered by the prohibition provided under section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Cases cited at the bar, based upon facts vastly distinguishable from the one in hand, are of not much assistance to the petitioners, as criminal cases are decided on the basis of their peculiar facts. Even otherwise, offences punishable with imprisonment for ten years or above would not fall out of the ambit of prohibition on the basis of lower sentence mandated as minimum ceiling, while certainly its benign impact can validly be considered favorably in an appropriate case having regard to the facts and circumstances thereof. Even otherwise, there is no legal compulsion to grant bail to an accused in offences punishable with imprisonment of less than 10 years as the Court can decline discretionary relief depending upon the nature of accusation and material in support thereof. Given the volume of the cache with potentially awful lethality of the consignment, pointed inexorably upon the petitioners, albeit reliance upon a valid license, purportedly, granted to the afore-named Rana Kalim Arshad is a position that cannot be attended within the restricted scope of tentative assessment in the absence of any tangible material. Crl.
Misc. No,95103-B of 2017 fails. Petition is dismissed. Copy of this order be transmitted to District Police Officer Chiniot, he shall verify the veracity of plea taken by the petitioners before this Court with regard to their claims that the consignment was being transported under a valid license with a view to rule out any complicity by the licensee.