ALI NAWAZ vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a bail application filed by the accused, Ali Nawaz, seeking pre-trial or post-arrest release in a criminal case. The core legal question concerns whether bail should be refused solely on the ground of the accused being an absconder against whom proceedings under Section 87 and 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 were initiated, particularly when co-accused with indistinguishable cases have already been granted bail. The Sindh High Court held that the rule regarding the refusal of bail to an absconder is not an absolute rule and that exceptions can be made depending on the circumstances, notably where co-accused have already been enlarged on bail. The court thus granted bail to the applicant subject to furnishing the requisite security, laying down the principle that the grant of bail to co-accused similarly placed serves as a valid ground for making an exception to the general rule withholding bail from absconders.
- Is the rule refusing bail to an absconder an absolute rule without exceptions?
- Does the grant of bail to co-accused constitute a sufficient ground to make an exception for an absconder?
- Can bail be granted to an accused when proceedings under Section 87 and 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 were ordered against him?
- Section 87, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 88, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' MAMOON KAZI, J.--- It has, inter alia, been contended that bail has been granted either by the High Court or by the learned trial Court to the other co-accused in the case and their case is not distinguishable from that of the present accused.
2. The only ground urged against grant of this bail application on behalf of the State by Mr. Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, learned AA.-G., is that the applicant was an absconder and proceedings under section 87/88, Cr.P.C. Had also been ordered to be taken against him. However, in this regard Mr. Fareed Ahmed Dayo has placed reliance upon State v. Malik Mukhtar Ahmed Awan 1991 SCM R 322, wherein it was observed that the rule laid by the Supreme Court regarding refusal of bail to an absconder is not an absolute rule and exceptions can always be made, depending upon the circumstances of the case.
3. ' In the present case since bail has already been granted to the co- accused in this case, in our view, it is sufficient ground for making exception in the present case.
4. ' Bail is, therefore, granted to the applicant in the sum of Rs, one lac with one surety for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court.
Cited by 12 cases
- SULEMAN vs THE STATE 2012 MLD 574
- SADULLAH vs THE STATE 2011 MLD 1806
- IMTIAZ ALI vs THE STATE 2010 MLD 651
- ZAINUL ABDIN vs THE STATE 2010 P Cr. L J 307
- MUHAMMAD HAYAT vs THE STATE 2009 MLD 779
- MUHAMMAD HAYAT vs THE STATE 2008 YLR 72
- MAHBOOB ALI and another vs THE STATE 2007 P Cr. L J 1631
- DATERDINO and 3 others vs THE STATE 2005 P C R L J 572
- ABDUL WAHAB vs THE STATE 2003 YLR 1915
- MUNEER AHMED vs Chaudhary ILTAF HUSSAIN,and another 2003 PLD Karachi 332
- ABDUL GHANI vs THE STATE 2003 P Cr. L J 421
- DATERDINO Versus The State 2005 PCRLJ 572