Muhammad Naseeb Ullah Versus Muhammad Mubeen

Criminal Revision Petition No. 34 of 2020, decided on 31st January, 2025.

Authored by Chaudhary Khalid Rasheed. Result: Revision dismissed.

Summary

This revision petition challenges an order passed by the District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction Kotli, whereby post-arrest bail was granted to the accused respondents in a case arising from FIR No. 33 of 2020 registered under sections 341, 147, 148, 149, and 337-AF of the Azad Penal Code. The core legal question concerned whether sufficient grounds existed to interfere with the discretionary order granting bail to the accused. The High Court held that considerations for granting and cancelling bail are distinct, and once bail is granted, strong and exceptional grounds—such as patent illegality, misuse of liberty, or tampering with evidence—are required for its cancellation. Noting that none of the statutory grounds for cancellation were made out and that the offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where bail is the rule and refusal the exception, the Court dismissed the revision petition and upheld the order granting bail. The Court laid down the principle that strong and exceptional grounds are required for the cancellation of bail once granted by a court of competent jurisdiction, and that in offences not falling within the prohibitory clause, bail is the rule and refusal is the exception.

Questions settled in this judgment

What grounds are required for the cancellation of bail once it has been granted by a court of competent jurisdiction?
Does an offence not falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure make bail the rule and refusal the exception?
Can a revisional court interfere with a bail-granting order without showing that the order was patently illegal or that the accused misused the concession of bail?

Laws & provisions referred

Section 341, Azad Penal Code
Section 147, Azad Penal Code
Section 148, Azad Penal Code
Section 149, Azad Penal Code
Section 337-AF, Azad Penal Code
Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898

post-arrest bailbail cancellationprohibitory clauserevision petitioncriminal procedure

Chaudhary Khalid Rasheed, J .---

Foreword:

The captioned revision petition has been filed against the order passed by learned District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction Kotli dated 31.08.2020, whereby post arrest bail application filed by accused/respondents has been accepted.

Precise facts forming background of the instant petition are, on the complaint of Muhammad Naseem, FIR No.33/2020 was registered at Police Station Narr in the offences under sections 341, 147/148,149,337-AF-APC on 06.05.2020. As per the allegations against the accused/respondents were, they beaten the complainant with sticks, stones, fists and kicks.

On arrest, the accused/respondents filed two separate applications before District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction Kotli for their release on bail. After hearing arguments pro and contra the learned District Criminal Court accepted the application and released the accused on bail vide its order dated 31.08.2020, hence the captioned revision petition.

STANCE OF THE PETITIONER:

The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that accused are nominated in the FIR and specific roles are attributed to them, hence are not entitled to get the concession of bail but the Court below by violating the principle governing the bail matters has released them on bail through the impugned order which is not sustainable.

REFUTATION OF THE RESPONDENTS:

The learned counsel for the respondents supported the impugned judgment on all counts.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, gone through the record of the case with utmost care and caution.

COURT OBSERVATIONS AND RELEVANT LAW:

The considerations for grant of bail and cancellation of the same are altogether different. Once the bail is granted by a Court of competent jurisdiction then strong and exceptional grounds would be required for cancellation thereof. There is no legal compulsion to cancel the bail of accused who allegedly committed a heinous offence. The grounds which can be considered for cancellation of bail mentioned by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in a judgment reported as 2020 SMCR 1115 are as under:-

i)If the bail granting order is patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and has resulted into miscarriage of justice.

ii)That accused has misused the concession of bail in any manner.

That accused has tried to hamper prosecution evidence by persuading/pressurizing prosecution witnesses.

iv)That there is likelihood of absconsion of the accused beyond the jurisdiction of Court.

v)That the accused has attempted to interfere with the smooth course of investigation.

vi)That accused misused his liberty while indulging into similar offence.

vii)That some fresh facts and material has been collected during the course of investigation which tends to establish guilt of the accused."

No such ground is available to the petitioner. Ordinarily the Courts are hesitant to interfere into the order extending concession of bail rather always show reluctance to intervene in such like matters. The Supreme Court of Pakistan in 1976 SCMR 360 has refused to recall the order extending concession of bail despite the fact that Court was not pleased with the order of bail recorded by High Court.

Furthermore, the alleged offences not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1) Cr.P.C. and in such offences, bail is rule and refusal exception, hence the Court below rightly appreciated the record and reached at a just conclusion which does not require any indulgence by this Court.

DISPOSAL:

The sum and substance of the above discussion is, the revision petition is hereby dismissed.

JK/13/AJK H.C Revision dismissed.

Judges on this bench

Chaudhary Khalid Rasheed73 judgments