Sardar Muhammad Asif Naqkshbandi vs The State through P.G. Sindh
The petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 419, 465, 468, 471, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, along with Section 30(2)(a), (e), and (f) of the National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance 2000, for allegedly obtaining a National Identity Card with false particulars while being an Afghan national. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to confirmation of pre-arrest bail. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the case warranted further inquiry as the petitioner claimed he obtained the CNIC in accordance with law, had previously served as a General Councillor, and no recovery was to be made from him, rendering his incarceration before trial pointless. Consequently, the Court converted the petition into an appeal, allowed it, set aside the impugned judgment, and confirmed the pre-arrest bail subject to regular appearance before the Trial Court and participation in the investigation.
- Whether pre-arrest bail should be confirmed when the case falls within the scope of further inquiry?
- Is a petitioner entitled to pre-arrest bail when no recovery is to be made and incarceration before trial serves no useful purpose?
- Section 419, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 465, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 30(2) a, e and f, National Database and Registration Authority Ordinance 2000
ORDER
FAISAL ARAB, J.---The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case registered vide Crime No. 151/2017 under sections 419, 465, 468, 471 and 34, P.P.C. read with section 30(2) a, e and f of NADRA Ordinance, 2000 at Police Station Bahadurabad. Brief allegation against the petitioner is that he is an Afghan national and has obtained Nadra CNIC with false particulars.
2. We find that the case of the petitioner is of further inquiry as his claim is that he has only obtained one CNIC and that too in accordance with law. He remained a General Councillor and no useful purpose would be served by sending him behind the bars before the conclusion of Trial. Nothing is to be recov ered from the petitioner . In this view of the matter , we convert this petiti on into appeal, allow it and set aside the impugned judgment. The pre- arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide this Court's order dated 24.07.2019 is hereby confirmed. The petitioner is directed to regularly appear before the Trial Court and join the investigation, failing which the bail granted would be withdrawn.