SUDHEER AHMAD alias Chan vs STATE and another
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused, Sudheer Ahmad alias Chan, in connection with FIR No. 04 dated 02.1.2018, registered under Sections 395 and 412 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Muzaffarabad, Multan, regarding an alleged dacoity. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the grant of bail given the circumstances of the investigation and the evidentiary gaps. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail, noting an unexplained five-hour delay in lodging the FIR, the fact that the petitioner was not nominated in the FIR, and serious questions regarding the legality of the identification parade, as his name appeared in a newspaper prior to the parade. Furthermore, the court observed that the alleged recovery was not supported by a memo of identification and that the petitioner had no previous criminal convictions. Consequently, the court exercised its discretion to grant bail, emphasizing that indefinite detention without sufficient evidence would be unfair.
- Is an unexplained delay in lodging an FIR a relevant factor for the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Does the appearance of an accused's name in a newspaper prior to an identification parade cast doubt on the legality of the parade?
- Can bail be granted when the recovery of stolen property is not supported by a memo of identification?
- Section 395, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 412, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 54, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Sudheer Ahmad alias Chan, petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No, 04 dated 02.1.2018 under Sections 395, 412, PPC registered at Police Station Muzaffarabad, Multan.
2. Allegedly, the petitioner committed dacoity.
3. Having heard the arguments addressed at the bar and after perusing the record, it transpired that there was unexplained delay of about five hours in lodging the. FIR. The petitioner is not nominated therein. He was arrested under Section 54, Cr.P.C. A photostat copy not disputed by the learned DDPP, revealed that name of the petitioner appeared in the Daily Express Multan dated 17.1.2018 and, thus, the legality of identification parade requires serious consideration. The recovery allegedly effected from the petitioner and is not supported by memo. of identification. The petitioner is behind the bars and his continuous detention for indefinite period would be unfair. He has, however, got no previous conviction at his credit, thus, I am inclined to exercise my discretion in his favour.
4. In view of the above, the application is allowed 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 the learned trial Court/Duty Judge.