ISHAQ MASIH vs THE STATE
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal against the concurrent refusal of bail by the lower courts to the petitioner, who was facing trial alongside co-accused under Section 20 of the Offence Against Property (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the evidentiary material available at the pre-trial stage. Counsel for the petitioner argued that there was no record indicating the petitioner's involvement in the alleged robbery or that he possessed knowledge that the recovered golden bangles were stolen property, suggesting that the case, at its highest, fell under Section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which carries a maximum sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment. The Advocate General of Sindh did not oppose the bail application. The Supreme Court, finding merit in the submissions, converted the petition into an appeal and allowed it, admitting the petitioner to bail upon the furnishing of a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the evidence does not clearly link them to the primary offence of robbery?
- Does the absence of opposition from the State influence the grant of bail in criminal proceedings?
- Can a case involving the possession of stolen property be considered bailable when the maximum punishment is three years' imprisonment?
- Section 20, Offence Against Property (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' The petitioner has been denied the bail by the two Courts below. He is facing trial under section 20 of the Offence Against Property (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 alongwith two co-accused.
2. In support of the bail application it has been submitted by Sardar Muhammad Ishaque learned counsel for the petitioner that there is noting on record to indicate that the petitioner was one of the accused who committed rebbery, nor there is any matrial to indicate that the petitioner had the knowledge that the nine golden bangles allegedly recovered from the petitioner were robbed.
3. According to him at the most the petitioner's case falls under section 411, P.P.C. Which is punishable by 3 years' R.I.
4. ' Mr. A.A. Akhund learned A.-G. Sindh at this stage does not oppose the bail.
5. ' The petitioner is admitted on bail in the sum of Rs,25,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The petition is converted into an appeal and allowed.
Cited by 4 cases
- Israr and another vs The State 2025 PHC 46
- Abdul Hadi alias Babul and 2 others vs The State 2024 PCRLJ 1521
- ASIF vs THE STATE 2012 YLR 211
- MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Versus STATE 1997 SCMR 412