ZAFAR IQBAL Versus State
This petition for pre-arrest bail arises from F.I.R. No. 611, registered under sections 337-F(i, iii, v), 337-A(i, ii), 337-L(ii), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioners sought pre-arrest bail on the grounds that the offense charged under section 337-L(ii) is bailable and that co-accused, who were attributed more severe injuries, had already been granted post-arrest bail. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to pre-arrest bail given the principle of consistency and the fact that their co-accused had already been released. The Court held that the petitioners were entitled to the relief sought. The ratio of the decision is that where co-accused facing more serious allegations have been granted bail, the petitioners are entitled to the same relief based on the principle of consistency. Furthermore, as the petitioners had joined the investigation, refusing bail would serve no useful purpose. Consequently, the Court confirmed the pre-arrest bail, subject to the furnishing of fresh bail bonds.
- Is a petitioner entitled to pre-arrest bail on the principle of consistency if co-accused with graver allegations have already been granted bail?
- Does the fact that an accused has joined the investigation support the grant of pre-arrest bail?
- Section 337-F(i, iii, v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i, ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM J.--- The petitioners through this petition, seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 611, dated 31-10-2006 registered under sections 337-F(i, iii, v)/A (i, ii)/337-L(ii)/148/149, P.P.C. with Police Station, Saddar Arifwala District Pakpattan Sharif, on the grounds that case of the petitioners falls under section 337-L(ii) P.P.C. which is bailable; and that co-accused of the petitioners, attributed injuries graver than petitioners have been allowed post-arrest bail.
2. On the other hand, learned DPG opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail on the ground that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief given to innocent persons to save them from disgrace and humiliation at the hands of police.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. Co-accused of the petitioners namely Yaqoob, Akram and Irshad had caused injuries grayer in nature than that of petitioners. They have been released on post-arrest bail. Ejaz carrying bat in his hand caused injuries on Faisal ur Rehman while Zafar Iqbal, with sota, on the person of Abid Ali. The petitioners have joined the investigation. No useful purpose would be served in refusing concession of pre-arrest bail as they will be entitled to the same relief as provided to their co-accused on principle of consistency. In Muhammad Ramzan v. Zafar Ullah and another (1986 SCMR 1380), the Honourable Supreme Court refused to cancel pre-arrest bail in almost similar circumstances.
5. For what has been discussed above, this petition is allowed and petitioners' bail already granted earlier by this Court is confirmed provided they furnish fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
N.H.Q./Z-11/L Pre-arrest bail granted.
Cited by 1 case
- Muhammad Shawaiz Abbasi, etc vs The State, etc 2021 YLR 1342, PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Islamabad) 905, 2021 IHC 56