MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Versus State
This matter arises from a petition filed by Muhammad Ashraf seeking pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.120 dated 20-4-2005 registered under Section 406 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Urban Area, Sargodha, after similar relief was refused by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner has established sufficient grounds, including mala fide or ulterior motives, to warrant the extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail when investigation and recovery remain incomplete. The Lahore High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the investigation qua the petitioner was incomplete as important recoveries, including ornaments and a sale-deed, were yet to be effected, and that the petitioner failed to point out any mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant or the police. The key principle laid down is that pre-arrest bail will be refused where the petitioner fails to demonstrate mala fide, political wire-pulling, or ulterior motives aimed at humiliation and unjustified harassment, particularly when investigation and recovery are still pending.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted when the investigation is incomplete and recoveries are yet to be effected?
- What are the governing principles for the grant of pre-arrest bail under Pakistani law?
- Is bail refused when an accused fails to establish mala fide or ulterior motives on the part of the complainant or police?
- Section 406, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.--- Muhammad Ashraf, petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.120 dated 20-4-2005 registered under section 406, P.P.C. with Police Station, Urban Area, Sargodha on the ground that he has falsely been implicated in the instant case; and that similar relief has been refused by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha vide his order dated 21-5-2005.
2. Conversely, learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for confirmation of bail and submitted that recovery of ornaments weighing 10 tolas, sale-deed of the house of the complainant and other articles are yet to be effected from the petitioner.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. The investigation qua him is incomplete as the recovery is yet to be effected from the petitioner. The petitioner has failed to point out any mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant or the police. The principles governing the grant of pre-arrest bail are that the petitioner accused has to show that the case was cropped up due to political wire pulling, the arrest being tainted with mala fide and ulterior motives such as humiliation and unjustified harassment at the hands of the police with intention to cause irreparable injury to the reputation and liberty of a person, which is lacking in this petition.
5. For what has been discussed above, this is meritless and is dismissed.
H.B.T./M-290/L ????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail refused.