Rashad Imran vs State and another
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, Rashad Imran, following the dismissal of his bail application by the High Court. The petitioner was apprehended by a Veterinary Officer while transporting 500 kg of beef and 60 kg of mutton on a meatless day. The confiscated meat was found to be unfit for human consumption, emitting a foul odor, and bearing fake stamps to simulate ante-mortem slaughter. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail given the circumstances of the seizure and the nature of the offense. The Supreme Court held that the seizure of substandard, hazardous meat on a restricted day, corroborated by official inventories and magisterial oversight, established a prima facie case. The Court found no evidence of mala fide intent by the State functionary. Consequently, the Court declined to grant pre-arrest bail, emphasizing that the mechanics of criminal law, which mandate arrest in cognizable and non-bailable offenses, should not be suspended without compelling grounds or evidence of oblique motives.
- Is pre-arrest bail available for offenses involving the transport of substandard meat on a meatless day?
- Does the involvement of a Magistrate in the seizure process lend credibility to the criminal case against an accused?
- Must an accused demonstrate mala fide intent on the part of the complainant to successfully obtain pre-arrest bail in a non-bailable case?
ORDER
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.-- Apprehending arrest, Rashid Imran, petitioner herein, after failure before the High Court, seeks bail in anticipation thereto; he along with co-accused was intercepted by a Veterinary Officer on 23.6.2021 at 9:00 p.m. with 500 kg. beef and 60 kg. mutton on a meatless day. Upon inspection, the complainant found the confiscated stuff cold on touch, dark reddish in texture emitting bad sme ll and as such manifestly unfit for human consumption; it carried fake stamps as deceit to suggest ante mortem slaughter. Upon a complaint, the police registered a criminal case, subsequent whereto, the impounded meat was destroyed with magisterial intervention.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. An inordinate stress laid by the learned counsel on the vires of exercise undertaken by the Veterinary Officer Gojra, notwithstanding, the seizure of substandard meat, grievously injurious for human consumption, on a meatless day i.e. Wednesday is established through the inventories of even date. Association of a Magistrate further lends credence to the procedure adopted. Quantity of confiscation is too considerable to be manipulated to set up a fake case, nor there appears any earthly reason for the complainant, a State functionary tasked with the responsibility of ensuring hygienic livestock supplies to the public, to proceed against the petitioner with motives, oblique or sinister, a sine qua non to suspend the mechanics of criminal law that mandatorily requires arrest in cognizable cases, scheduled as non-bailable. Petition fails. Leave declined.