MUHAMMAD IQBAL Versus THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, who was accused of involvement in the theft of diesel from a pipeline belonging to Pak Arab Refinery. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the grant of bail given the nature of the allegations, the duration of his incarceration, and the status of the investigation. The Court held that the petitioner should be admitted to bail, noting that he had been in custody for over four months without the submission of a challan, that he was not apprehended at the scene of the crime, and that the recovery effected was minimal. The Court emphasized the principle that the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, particularly in cases where the trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future and the accused has no prior criminal record. Consequently, the Court granted the bail application, subject to the petitioner furnishing surety bonds to the satisfaction of the relevant Judicial Magistrate.
- Is the grant of bail in non-prohibitory clause offences considered the rule and refusal the exception?
- Can an accused be denied bail solely on the basis of the nature of the offence when the investigation is delayed and the recovery is minimal?
- Does the absence of a prior criminal record and the delay in the submission of a challan justify the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 457, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 380, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 13, Prevention of Anti-National Activities Act 1974
ORDER
Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.10 of 2002, dated 16-1-2002 under sections 457/380/411, P.P.C. and section 13 of the Anti National Activity Act, 1974.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is Administration Officer in PARCO Faisalabad which is owned by PAK ARAB Refinery and Abu-Dhabi which prepares Petroleum products and supplies it from Karachi to Machike District, Sheikhpura through Mehmod Kot at Adda Soling Hassu Balil in the night between 14/15 January, 2002 at 1.00 p.m. Chowkidar Muhammad Hanif on telephone informed the complainant that Nadeem and Zafar Chowkidar are involved in stealing the diesel on Pick-up which came there and loaded the same. The diesel was being stolen by a Pipe-line and in connivance with the petitioner and other co-accused.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner contends that the offence under section 13 of the Prevention of Anti-National Activities Act, 1974 is not applicable as the petitioner is not involved in such-like activities. It is further contended that section 457, P.P.C. is also not applicable as the theft has not been committed from the house and at the most the case falls under sections 380 and 411, P.P.C, which are punishable with seven years' R.I. each. The grant of bail in such-like cases is a rule and refusal is an exception. It is further contended that the recovery has not been effected from the petitioner, and he is behind the bars for the last four months. The challan has not yet been submitted and the remaining of petitioner in jail will serve no purpose for the prosecution.
4. Learned State counsel has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner who is involved in heinous offence of stealing the Diesel through the pipe-line is not entitled to any relief arid as two cases of Diesel were recovered from the accused hence there is sufficient evidence on record to connect the petitioner with the commission of the crime.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record carefully. The allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith co-accused is involved in a theft of Diesel amounting Rs.15,000. The petitioner is behind the bars for the last more than 4 months. The recovery has already been effected from the accused of two cases of Diesel valuing Rs.1,000 at the most. Nothing else has been recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner was not apprehended at the spot. In such circumstances, the petitioner who is, not involved previously in any criminal case cannot be kept behind the bars for a long period without trial which is not likely to be completed within shortest possible time. He is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (one lac) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, Shorkot.
H.B.T./M-2426/L Bail granted.