Sohail Ahmad Ghauri vs State etc
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail petition filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 in respect of F.I.R. No. 1391 registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 regarding the dishonour of cheques. The core legal question concerns whether post-arrest bail should be granted when the accused and the complainant have effected a compromise in a compoundable offence. The Lahore High Court held that the petition should be allowed, granting post-arrest bail to the petitioner. The key principle laid down is that a compromise between parties in a compoundable offence is a redeeming feature fostering societal peace, and where a complainant voluntarily compounds the case and raises no objection to bail, the matter falls within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, rendering further detention of the accused unnecessary.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted on the basis of a compromise between the parties in an offence under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Does a compromise in a compoundable offence constitute grounds for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be granted when the complainant submits an affidavit stating no objection to the allowance of the bail application?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 345, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Through this petition u/S. 497, Cr.P.C., petitioner Sohail Ahmad Ghauri, seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 1391 dated 17.12.2013 registered u/S. 489-F , PPC, at Police Station A-Division, Okara.
2. Briefly , the allegation against the petitioner as per crime report lodged by Malik Muhammad Akram Shad, is that he issued three cheques amounting to Rs. 9,50,001/- in favour of the complainant which on presentation before the concerned bank, were dishonoured.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. At the very outset learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner Sohail Ahmad Ghauri has settled the dispute with the complainant Malik Muhammad Akram Shad, who has no objection if bail application of the petitioner is allowed.
5. Malik Muhammad Akram Shad complainant, present in the Court along with his learned counsel, has endorsed the factum of compromise between the parties and submitted affidavit (Mark-A) and states that he has no objection if bail application of the petitioner is allowed.
6. Learned D.P.G. for the State has not opposed this bail petition on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties.
7. Record reveals that the offence with which the petitioner has been charged is compoundable as mentioned in Section 345, Cr.P.C. The compromise between the parties has always been held a redeeming feature, which brings peace and harmony in the society and only for this reason, the Courts have always respected enthusiasm and passion of the parties to compound the offence. The statement of the complainant coupled with his affidavit (Mark- A) reflects that he has entered into compromise of his own free will and conse nt and has no objection if bail application of the petitioner is allowed. In view of the above-mentioned facts the case of the petitioner calls for further inquiry falling under sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. He is behind the bars and no more required for further investigation. No useful purpose would be served to the prosecution for his further detention.
8. Consequently , while taking into consid eration the statement of the complainan t before the Court and affidavit (Mark-A), this petition is allowed and post arrest bail application of the petitioner , Sohail Ahmad Ghauri, is allowed, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. However , the parties are bound down regarding the terms of the compromise.