Taimoor vs Muhammad Yawar Ubaid and another
The accused-petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 1 dated 01.01.2021 registered under Sections 419, 420, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Gumbat, District Kohat, relating to the alleged sale of a non-custom paid vehicle with forged documents and impersonation. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail when the charged offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Peshawar High Court held that since the offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause, the grant of bail is the general rule and its refusal is an exception, and the respondent failed to establish any exceptional circumstances. The petition was accordingly allowed, and the petitioner was directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing appropriate surety bonds. The key principle laid down is that in criminal cases where offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception.
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when the charged offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the grant of bail become the rule and refusal an exception in cases not falling within the prohibitory clause?
- Section 419, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
After having been failed to get the conc ession of bail from the lower forum, accused-petitioner Taimoor son of Farhat Ullah Shah, through the instant petition has prayed for his release on bail in case FIR No. 1 dated 01.01.2021 registered under Sections 419/420/468/ 471, PPC at Police Station Gumbat, District Kohat.
2. Arguments heard and record of the case was perused.
3. As per contents of FIR the allegation against the present petitioner are that he had sold a car to the complainant against consideration of Rs. 1,800,000/-, however , when the complainant party visited the office of Excise and Taxation Department, Islamabad there they were informed that the vehicle in question is non custom paid, its chassis number is deciphered and the documents are forged. Resultantly the vehicle was impounded on 09.03.2020 by the officials of Excise and Taxation Department, Islamabad. It is further the case of the complainant that the present petitioner has imperson ated himself by disclosing his name as Said Khan instead of his actual name as Taimoor Khan and after hectic ef forts they were able to trace the present petitioner .
4. Without touching other merit of the case suffice it to mention that the offences for which the accused/petitioner is charged do not fall under the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. and it is settled law that the cases which do not fall in the prohibitory clause of Sectio n 497 Cr.P.C., the grant of bail is a rule and its refusal is an exception.
Reliance is placed on "Tariq Bashir and 5 others us. The State" (PLD 1995 Supreme Court 34) and "Muhammad Tanveer vs. The State and another" (PLD 2017 Supreme Court 733). The learned counsel for the respondent could not impress the Court that the case of the present petitioner falls within exception.
5. In this view of the matter , this bail petiti on is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,000,000/- (rupees one million) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of concerned Judicial Magistrate/MOD, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means.