ALI NAWAZ vs STATE and another
The petitioner Ali Nawaz sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 206/2016 registered under Sections 324, 337-F(i), 337-F(v), and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Saddar Kehror Pacca, Lodhran, on allegations of attempting to take the life of the injured, Sajjad. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail considering the merits of the case, unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, non-infliction of injuries on vital parts despite opportunity, and statutory delay in the commencement of the trial. The Lahore High Court held that the case called for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, noting that absconsion alone does not bar bail if an accused has a strong case on merits. The court established the principle that continuous indefinite detention without trial progress, coupled with mitigating circumstances on the merits of the accusation, warrants the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when there is an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and no injuries are inflicted on vital parts of the body?
- Does the absconsion of an accused disentitle them to bail if they have a good case on merits?
- Does continuous indefinite detention without material progress in the trial render a case one of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Ali Nawaz, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 206/2016 dated 04.06.2016, under Sections 324, 337-F(i), 337-F(v), 34, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Saddar Kehror Pacca, Lodhran.
2. Allegedly, the petitioner attempted at the life of Salad, the injured.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it was noticed that there was unexplained delay of one and half hour in lodging the F.I.R. Despite the fact that the petitioner was armed with rifle and that the injured was at his mercy but he inflicted no injury on the upper part/vital part of the body. It would be interesting question for the learned trial Court if he intended to eliminate the injured. The petitioner was arrested in this case on 01.02.2018 and since then he is behind the bars. The trial has not witnessed any material progress so far. The concession of bail to an accused cannot be denied merely on the ground that he was fugitive from law if he has good case for bail on merits and his absconsion would not come in his way. Ref "Mitho Pitafi v. The State" (2009 SCM R 299). The petitioner is in jail since his arrest and his continuous detention for indefinite period would be unfair. All these considerations render the case of the petitioner one of through probe within the meaning of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
4. For the reasons mentioned above, the application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to satisfaction of learned trial Court/ duty judge.