Abdul Rahim Gopang & another vs The State
This matter arises from a criminal case where the applicants sought pre-arrest bail after being refused by the Court of Session, Shikarpur. The core legal question concerns whether the applicants were entitled to pre-arrest bail in light of an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, a pre-existing property dispute, and police recommendations to dispose of the case under 'B' class. The Sindh High Court held that the applicants made out a case for pre-arrest bail on the ground of mala fide, considering the delayed FIR, the civil/plot dispute between the parties, the police report favoring cancellation under 'B' class, and the applicants' compliance with the interim bail terms without misuse. The court laid down the principle that pre-arrest bail is justified where police investigation recommends cancellation under 'B' class and where mala fide is apparent due to an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR coupled with a prior underlying dispute between the parties.
- Whether an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR constitutes a ground for granting pre-arrest bail?
- Does a police recommendation to dispose of a case under 'B' class support the grant of pre-arrest bail?
- Can pre-arrest bail be confirmed when a pre-existing dispute over property exists between the parties?
- Section 498-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged that the applicants with rest of the culprits, after keeping complainant Baqaullah and his witnesses under fear of death, robbed them of their money by way of maltreatment, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicants on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned Session Judge, Shikarpur , have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 498-A Cr.PC.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party only to settle its dispute with them over plot; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one month and very case on investigation was recommended by the police to be disposed of under false "B" class; therefore, the applicants are entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail, as they are apprehending their unjustified arrest at the hands of police.
4. Learned Asstt. Prosecutor General for the State has sought for dismissal of the instant bail application by contending that the applicants have committed the of fence which is af fecting the society at large.
5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about one month and such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The parties are already disputed over the possession of plot. The very case on investigation was recommended by the police to be cancelled under false "B" class. The applicants have joined the trial and they have not misused the conc ession of pre-arrest bail. In these circumstances, a case for grant of pre- arrest bail on point of malafide in favour of the applicants obviously is made out.
7. In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants is confirmed on same terms and conditions.
8. The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly .