ALTAF HUSSAIN vs STATE etc
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 433/2018 registered under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979 at Police Station Saddar Multan, following the alleged recovery of 160 liters of liquor from a distillery. The core legal question was whether the petitioner made out a case for post-arrest bail where the charged offences fell outside the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and the chemical report was awaited. The Lahore High Court held that since the offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause, grant of bail was the rule and refusal the exception, and the awaiting forensic report rendered the matter one of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court accepted the bail application, laying down the principle that indefinite detention is unfair when the prosecution cannot assert with certitude the nature of the recovered material pending a forensic report, and that bail should be granted as a rule in non-prohibitory clause offences absent exceptional circumstances.
- Whether post-arrest bail should be granted when the alleged offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the absence of a forensic report from the Punjab Forensic Science Agency make the prosecution's case one of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is continuous indefinite detention of an accused justified when the nature of the recovered material is yet to be established with certitude?
- Article 3, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Article 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Altaf Hussain, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 433/2018 dated 06.11.2018, under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order IV of 1979, registered at Police Station Saddar Multan.
2. Allegedly , the petitioner was running a distillery and 160 liter liquor was recovered therefrom.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it was noticed that the offences with which the petitioner is charged do not fall under the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. and grant of bail in such like cases is rule and refusal thereto is an exception. Learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor could not point out any exceptional circumstance. The petitioner has got no previous conviction at his credit. The report of Punjab Forensic Science Agency is yet awaited, thus, prosecution cannot assert with certitude that the material recovered from the petitioner was liquor or something else. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and his continuous detention for indefinite period would be unfair . All these considerations render the case of prosecution one of further inquiry within the ambit of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C., thus, I am inclined to exercise my discretion in favour of the petitioner .
4. In view of the 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 the satisfaction of learned trial Court/duty judge. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.