USMAN ALI vs STATE, etc.
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, Usman Ali, in relation to FIR No. 334 dated 19.10.2014, registered at Police Station Tarkhani, District Faisalabad, for offences under Sections 427, 353, 324, 337-A(iii), 337H(2), 188, 186, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who had been declared a proclaimed offender and had remained a fugitive from law since the registration of the FIR, was entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner's unexplained abscondence disentitled him to the relief of bail. Relying on established jurisprudence, the Court affirmed the principle that a fugitive from law loses certain normal procedural and substantive rights, including the right of audience. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any mala fide intent regarding his intended arrest and that the statutory prohibitions under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 were applicable, thereby precluding the confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail.
- Does an unexplained abscondence of an accused person disentitle them to the concession of pre-arrest bail?
- Does a fugitive from law lose the right of audience in court proceedings?
- Is an accused person who has been declared a proclaimed offender entitled to the confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail?
- Section 427, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337H(2), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 188, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 186, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Usman Ali, petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No, 334 dated 19.10.2014 registered at Police Station Tarkhani, District Faisalabad for offences under Sections 427, 353, 324, 337-A(iii), 337H(2), 188, 186, 148, 149, PPC.
2. Allegedly, the petitioner being member of unlawful assembly and in prosecution of its common object attempted at the life of Umer Sohail.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued the application at some length but could not satisfactorily explain regarding conduct of the petitioner who never surrendered before the learned Court since 19.10.2014 and was declared a proclaimed offender. By now it is settled law losses some of his normal rights in particular, the right of audience. A similar question came up under consideration before their lordships in case of "Awal Gul v. Zawar Khan and others" reported as (PLD 1985 SC 402). I cannot do better than quoting the relevant observations appearing at page 405 which reads as under.
"....that a fugitive from law and Courts loses some of the normal rights granted by the procedural as also substantive law. It is also a well-established proposition that unexplained noticeable abscondence disentitles a person to the concession of bail notwithstanding the merits of the case- -the principle being that the accused by his conduct thwarts the investigation qua him in which valuable evidence (like recoveries etc.) is simply lost or is mode impossible to be collected (by his conduct). He cannot then seek a reward for such a conduct (in becoming fugitive from law)."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to establish if his intended arrest was tainted with mala fide. The prohibition contained a under Section 497, Cr.P.C. is also attracted in this case. The petitioner failed to make out a case for confirmation of his ad-interim pre-arrest bail.
5. Seeking Guidance from the observations of their lordships and respectfully following the same, I find no merit in this case which is hereby dismissed.