Rashad Imran vs The State and another
This petition for pre-arrest bail arises from a criminal case registered against the petitioner for the transportation of substandard meat on a meatless day. The petitioner, intercepted by a Veterinary Officer, was found in possession of 500 kg of beef and 60 kg of mutton that were unfit for human consumption and bore fake stamps. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail given the circumstances of the seizure and the nature of the alleged offense. The Court held that the seizure of a significant quantity of unhygienic meat, verified by inventories and the presence of a Magistrate, established a prima facie case. The Court found no evidence of mala fides or oblique motives on the part of 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. The judgment reaffirms that significant evidence of public health endangerment precludes the exercise of discretionary relief in pre-arrest bail matters.
- Is pre-arrest bail maintainable when there is substantial evidence of a cognizable and non-bailable offense involving public health?
- Does the presence of a Magistrate during the seizure of evidence lend credibility to the procedure adopted by State functionaries?
- Can the mechanics of criminal law requiring arrest be suspended in the absence of mala fides or oblique motives by the complainant?
ORDER
QAZI M UHAM M AD AM IN AHM ED, 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.
Cited by 2 cases
- Naveed Tariq and another vs The State etc 2024 LHC 3326, 2025 PCRLJ 627
- Naveed Tariq Versus State 2025 PCrLJ 627