KHUSHI MOHAMMAD vs THE STATE
The appellant filed an appeal against the refusal of bail by the lower courts in a criminal case involving charges under section 6 of the West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958 and section 14 of the West Pakistan Paddy and Rice (Control) Order, 1958 for importing six maunds of rice into Lahore. The core legal question was whether the courts below were required to give reasons for refusing bail under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the alleged offence is not punishable with death or transportation for life. The Supreme Court held that the lower courts erred in refusing bail without proper reasons or on extraneous grounds, and considering that the maximum sentence is three years and no steps towards trial were taken by the prosecution since leave was granted, the appeal was allowed and bail was confirmed. The key principle laid down is that under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, courts must properly evaluate and provide reasons when refusing bail in offences not punishable with death or transportation for life.
- Are courts required to give reasons for refusing bail under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 for offences not punishable with death or transportation for life?
- Can bail be refused by a Magistrate or Sessions Judge without assigning proper reasons?
- What is the effect of prolonged delay in bringing the accused to trial on an interim bail granted by the Supreme Court?
- Section 6, West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act 1958
- Section 14, West Pakistan Paddy and Rice (Control) Order 1958
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.-The appellant was arrested on 1-1-1967 on charges under section- 6 of the West Pakistan Foodstuffs (Control) Act, 1958, and section 14 of the West Pakistan Paddy and Rice (Control) Order, 1958, on the accusation that he had in contravention of these laws imported into Lahore six maunds of rice.
2. Bail was refused to the appellant by -a local Magistrate without assigning any reason. An appeal taken to the Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, was rejected or the ground that the appellant is a kumhar by caste. The learned Judge in the High Court dismissed a revision petition without giving any reason in support of the order refusing bail.
3. Leave to appeal was granted on the 31st January 1967, to consider the plea that since the offence allegedly committed by we appellant was not punishable with death or transportation for life, the Courts below were under section 497, Cr. P. C., required to give reasons for refusing bail. Interim bail was allowed to the appellant to the satisfaction of the Additional District Magistrate, Lahore, meanwhile.
4. Since leave was granted no steps have been taken by the prosecution to bring the appellant to trial. The maximum sentence for the offence allegedly committed by him is 3 years, or fine, or both.
5. Keeping in view the provisions of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the circumstances of the case, we allow the appeal and confirm the bail granted to the appellant on 31st January 1967.