Rehan-Ud-Din vs State etc
This petition for pre-arrest bail arises from F.I.R. No. 13/2020, registered under Sections 467, 468, 471, and 161 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947, at Police Station ACE, District Multan. The core legal question before the Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail following a compromise reached between the petitioner and the complainant. During the proceedings, the complainant appeared in person, confirmed the existence of a compromise, and submitted an affidavit and an 'Iqrarnama' (agreement) stating he had no objection to the confirmation of the bail. The Deputy District Public Prosecutor did not vehemently oppose the petition. Upon consideration of the complainant's categorical statement and the submitted documents, the Court allowed the petition. The holding confirmed the ad-interim pre-arrest bail, subject to the petitioner furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 100,000 with one surety. The judgment affirms that a compromise between the parties, where the complainant expresses no objection, serves as a valid ground for confirming pre-arrest bail.
- Can a pre-arrest bail be confirmed solely on the basis of a compromise between the petitioner and the complainant?
- Does the lack of objection from the complainant regarding a compromise constitute sufficient grounds for the confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail?
- Section 467, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
ORDER
Through this petition, Rehan ud Din petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case arising out of F.I.R. No. 13/2020, dated 19.09.2020 registered under Sections 467,468,471/161, PPC read with Section 5(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, at Police Station ACE District Multan.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Muhammad Ramzan complainant of this case has ef fected compromise with petitioner .
3. Muhammad Ramzan (complainant), present in Court, submits that he has effected compromise with the petitioner and has no objection on confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to him. He has also submitted an affidavit in this regard which has been placed on record of instant petition as 'Mark-N. He has also produced 'Iqrarnama' entered into between the parties which has also been placed on record of instant petition as 'Mark-B' comprising two pages.
4. Learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor has not vehemently opposed this petition.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. It has been noticed that Muhammad Ramzan (complainant) of the case has categorically stated before this Court that he has effected compromise, with the petitioner and has no objection on confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to him. In view' of the fact that complainant of this case has effected compromise with the petitioner , instant petition filed by the petitioner for pre-arrest bail is allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to Rehan-ud-Din (petitioner) is confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.
100,000/- (Rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.