MUHAMMAD BILAL Versus State Muhammad Bilal Butt
This matter concerns a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, Muhammad Bilal, who was nominated in F.I.R. No. 238 of 2007 registered under sections 452, 427, 448, 511, 337-H(ii), 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Alpa, District Multan. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail given the allegations of criminal trespass and causing injuries, particularly in light of existing civil litigation between the parties. The Court observed that a civil suit regarding the property where the incident occurred was pending, and a status quo order had been issued in favor of the petitioner's side. Furthermore, the Court noted that all co-accused had already been granted bail. Consequently, the Court held that the existence of civil litigation raised a distinct possibility of mala fide involvement of the petitioner. The petition was accepted, and the interim pre-arrest bail was confirmed. The key principle laid down is that the pendency of civil litigation regarding the subject property can establish a reasonable possibility of mala fide, justifying the grant of pre-arrest bail.
- Does the existence of pending civil litigation regarding the property in dispute provide grounds for pre-arrest bail?
- Can the fact that co-accused have been granted bail be a relevant consideration for the bail of a petitioner?
- Does the possibility of mala fide involvement in a criminal case justify the confirmation of pre-arrest bail?
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 427, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 448, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 511, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-H(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
SH. AZMAT SAEED, J .---Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.238 of 2007, dated 20-7-2007 under sections 452, 427, 448, 511, 337-H(ii), 148, 149, P.P.C. at Police Station Alpa District Multan.
2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, is that the petitioner-Muhammad Bilal armed with .12-bore gun along with 18 others also armed with deadly weapons and sotas, after having formed an unlawful assembly criminally trespassed into the house of the complainant and caused injuries to him as well as the other P.Ws.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a civil suit is pending inter se the parties in respect of the property whereat the alleged occurrence took place and in the said civil suit, a status quo order had been granted against the complainant party. Adds that the offences do not attract the prohibitory clause. All the other co-accused of the petitioner have already been granted bail.
4. Learned counsel for the prosecution and the complainant contested the grant of bail to the petitioner. It is contended that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. a specific role is attributed to him and no ground for pre-arrest bail is made out.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. It appears that there is a civil litigation inter se the parties filed by petitioner's sister in respect of the property whereat the alleged occurrence took place. Apparently, a status quo order has been passed in the said case. In view of the pendency of the said litigation, there is a distinct possibility of mala fide qua false involvement of the petitioner. All the other co-accused have been granted bail. Consequently, this petition is accepted and the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide order, dated 24-9-2007 is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
N.H.Q./M-547/L Pre-arrest bail allowed.
Cited by 3 cases
- Muteen ur Rehman etc vs The State etc 2021 LHC 8213, PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 697
- Muteen Ur Rehman and others vs The State and others 2023 PCRLJ 468
- Muhammad Zameer and another vs The State and another 2022 MLD 1059