MUHAMMAD ASLAM Versus State
This petition for pre-arrest bail arises from F.I.R. No. 194 registered under sections 392 and 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following the dismissal of a similar application by the Additional Sessions Judge. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail given the specific evidentiary circumstances of the case. The Court noted a significant delay in lodging the F.I.R., the prior private recovery of the stolen property, and the fact that the complainant and key witnesses appeared in person to state that the petitioner was not the perpetrator. Furthermore, the investigation was complete, and a challan had been submitted. The Court held that detaining the petitioner would serve no useful purpose and that the initial implication of the petitioner appeared motivated by factors other than bona fide. Consequently, the Court confirmed the ad interim pre-arrest bail. The principle established is that where the complainant and witnesses exonerate the accused and the recovery of stolen property has already occurred, the necessity for custodial detention is negated, warranting the confirmation of pre-arrest bail.
- Is pre-arrest bail justified when the complainant and witnesses state the accused is not the perpetrator?
- Does the prior recovery of stolen property before the registration of an F.I.R. impact the necessity of custodial detention?
- Can pre-arrest bail be confirmed when the investigation is complete and a challan has been submitted to the trial court?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Through this petition Muhammad Aslam petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.194 registered at Police Station, Qaboola Sharif, District Pakpattan Sharif on 22-5-2004 for offences under sections 392/411, P.P.C. Earlier on an application submitted by the petitioner for the same relief before the Court of Session, Pakpattan Sharif had been dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Arifwala, District Pakpattan Sharif on 18-10-2004. Hence, the present petition before this Court.
2. The F.I.R. in this case had been lodged with a delay of one month and sixteen days and admittedly the stolen motor-cycle had been privately recovered even prior to registration of the F.I.R. Falak Sher complainant, Allah Bakhsh P.W. and the alleged victim namely Muhammad Amin have all entered appearance before this Court in person today and they have maintained before this Court in unison that they now feel satisfied that it was not the present petitioner who had perpetrated the alleged offence. They have owned their affidavits appended with this petition in this regard. The Police Officer present with the record has informed the Court that after investigation a challan has already been submitted before the learned trial Court. In these circumstances sending the petitioner behind the bars at such a stage is not likely to serve any useful purpose. The stolen motor-cycle already stands recovered from an open field and, thus, nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner s possession at this stage. In view of the stand taken by the complainant and the other witnesses before this Court today the initial implication of the petitioner in the case in hand on account of motives other than bona fide cannot be ruled out of consideration. This petition is, therefore, accepted and the ad interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner by this Court vide order dated 2-11-2004 is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing of a fresh bail bond by the petitioner in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Area Magistrate of Police Station, Qaboola Sahrif, District Pakpattan Sharif within a period of two weeks from today.
H.B.T./M-876/L Bail granted.