Adeel Manzoor vs State and others
This matter arises from a petition impugning the order of the Lahore High Court declining pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, Adeel Manzoor, in case FIR No. 647 registered under Sections 850 and 452 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 relating to allegations of theft of household articles. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner has established sufficient mala fide and ulterior motives on the part of the complainant to warrant the confirmation of pre-arrest bail, particularly considering prior family litigation, an ex-parte decree for the recovery of dowry articles, the visit of the court bailiff on the date of occurrence, and the suppression of material facts in the FIR. The Supreme Court held that the suppression of vital facts by the complainant, coupled with the parity of the petitioner's case with a co-accused whose bail was not challenged, established mala fide. Consequently, the petition was converted into an appeal and allowed, confirming the pre-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that the suppression of material facts and civil litigation history between parties in a criminal complaint can establish mala fide, entitling the accused to pre-arrest bail.
- Whether the suppression of material facts in an FIR by the complainant can establish mala fide for the grant of pre-arrest bail?
- Does the principle of parity apply when determining the pre-arrest bail of an accused whose role is identical to a co-accused?
- Can prior civil litigation and execution proceedings regarding dowry articles affect the bona fides of a criminal case?
- Section 850, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Sardar Tariq Masood, J.--The petitioner Adeel Manzoor through this petition has impugned the order dated 19.09.2022 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby, pre-arrest bail was declined to him in case FIR No. 647 dated 07.04.2022, registered at Police Station Sundar District Lahore, under Sections 850 and 452 of the Pakistan Penal Code.
2. The allegation against the petitioner, his co-accused Touqeer, Manzoor Ahmed and seven other un-known persons is that they stole away house hold articles of the complainant.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APO and counsel for the complainant, we observed that complainant Khudadad Bhandara is husband of the sister of the petitioner and she had filed a suit for recovery of dowry articles which was decreed ex-parte and in the execution proceedings, the bailiff was appointed to recover the said articles. On 24.03.2022, which Is the date of occurrence of this case, the bailiff visited the house of the complainant but failed to recover the same. According to the bailiff, the complainant was not present in the house and he kept on waiting for two hours and thus proceedings remained un-successful. While lodging the FIR, the complainant had totally suppressed the relationship of the petitioner with the complainant and also suppressed the fact of ex-parte decree dated 25.2.2022. Even the arrival of the bailiff has also been suppressed. All these circumstances clearly indicate the mala fide and ulterior motive on the part of the complainant. The co-accused Manzoor Ahmed who was the father-in-law of the complainant was also nominated as one of the accused but during the investigation it was opined by the Investigating Officer that he was not present there and his bail was confirmed through the impugned order which was not challenged. The case of the petitioner is at par with his co-accused Manzoor Ahmed because the role against both these persons is the same, mentioned in the FIR. The petitioner has also joined the investigation. It will be the trial Court who, after recording of the evidence, will determine the guilt of the petitioner when his sister already has a decree in her favour,
4. Due to the above-mentioned reasons, when petitioner remained successful in proving the mala fide on the part of the complainant, this petition is converted into an appeal and the same is allowed. The pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner is hereby confirmed, subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds of Rs, 100,000/. (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.