Muhammad Daniyal Farrukh Ansari vs The State
The petitioner sought leave to appeal against the order of the Islamabad High Court denying him post-arrest bail in case FIR No.20 dated 20.09.2020 registered under sections 11, 20, 21, and 22 of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016 read with sections 34 and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station FIA Cyber Crime Reporting Center, Islamabad. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail where the alleged offenses fell outside the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Supreme Court observed that the offenses fell outside the prohibitory clause, making the grant of bail the general rule and its refusal the exception, and no exceptional circumstances were shown to justify withholding bail. The criminal petition was converted into an appeal and allowed, granting the appellant bail subject to surety bonds. The key principle laid down is that in offenses falling outside the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, bail is the rule and refusal is the exception unless exceptional circumstances are established.
- Whether bail should be granted when the alleged offenses fall outside the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- What is the standard rule for granting bail in cases where the offenses do not fall within the prohibitory clause?
- Section 11, Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016
- Section 20, Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016
- Section 21, Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016
- Section 22, Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act 2016
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---Petitioner seeks leave to appeal agains t the order dated 24.11.2020 whereby bail was refused to him by the learned Islama bad High Court, Islamabad in case FIR No.20 dated 20.09.2020, offence under sections 11, 20, 21, 22, PECA 2016, read with sections 34/109, P.P.C., registered at Police Station FIA Cyber Crime Reporting Center , Islamabad.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Deputy Attorney General at length and perusal of available record with their assistance, it has been observed by us that offences alleged against the petitioner fall outside the prohibitory clause of section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure learned Deputy Attorney General has not disputed this fact. Grant of bail in such like cases is a rule and refusal an exception. No exceptional circumstances have been pointed out to refuse concession of bail to the petitioner .
3. For the foregoing, the instant criminal petition is converted into an appeal and the same is hereby allowed. The appellant-Muhammad Daniyal Farrukh Ansari is allowed bail (in the instant FJR) subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (one, hundred thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.
Cited by 5 cases
- Muhammad Amjad Naeem vs The State thr. PG Punjab and another 2025 SCP 194
- MUHAMMAD AMJAD NAEEM Versus State 2025 SCMR 1130
- Zain-ul-Abideen Shah Versus State 2025 YLR 1854
- Faisal Malhi Versus State 2025 YLR 2393
- Fakhar Zaman vs The State and another 2023 PCRLJ 496