HUMERA TAYYABA Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH

The petitioners who are involved in a case under sections 337-A(i) and 365, P.P.C. arising out of F.I.R. No.292, dated 14-10-1993, registered at Police Station City Chiniot, seek to be admitted to bail.

2. As per F.I.R., the allegation against the petitioners is that they abducted Nasir P.W. and also belaboured him.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that section 365, P.P.C. has since been deleted and offences under sections 337-A(i) and 341, P.P.C. do not fall within the prohibitory clause, because maximum sentence for these offences under the law is not more than two years. The petitioners are behind the bars and no longer required by the police for further interrogation.

Learned counsel further contended that the learned Magistrate allowed bail to the petitioners vide his order, dated 3-11-1993, which was cancelled by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chiniot, vide his order, dated 5-12-1993, without any legal justification.

4. Learned counsel for the State assisted by the Police Officer has conceded this fact that section 365, P.P.C. has been deleted and the petitioners are now being prosecuted under sections 337-A(i) and 341, P.P.C.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. Admittedly, the offences for which the petitioners are being prosecuted do not fall within the prohibitory clause. In such like cases, grant of bail is a rule and refusal is an exception. There is force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned Additional sessions Judge while cancelling the bail of the petitioners did not follow the dictum of this Court that bail should be cancelled in exceptional case i.e. where an accused person misused the concession of bail. In this case, there was no tangible evidence available on the record with respect to the misuse of concession of bail by the petitioners. In this view of the matter, the petitioners are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 (fifty thousand only) with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C., Chiniot.

N.H.Q./M-1502/L

Bail allowed.