MUHAMMAD ALI and another vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a criminal miscellaneous petition seeking post-arrest bail for petitioners Muhammad Ali and Zafar alias Zafri before the Lahore High Court. During the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioners did not press the petition regarding petitioner No.2, Zafar alias Zafri, resulting in the dismissal of the petition to that extent. Regarding the remaining petitioner, Muhammad Ali, the court observed that his assigned role was similar to that of a co-accused, Abdul Rashid, who had already been granted bail by the court in a previous proceeding. Applying the established legal principle of consistency, the court accepted the petition for Muhammad Ali and admitted him to bail subject to furnishing requisite security bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court.
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused on the ground of consistency when a co-accused with a similar role has already been admitted to bail?
- Can a criminal miscellaneous petition for bail be dismissed as not pressed in part?
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner does not press this petition to the extent of petitioner No.2 namely Zafar alias Zafri. So to his extent this petition is dismissed.
2. As far as Muhammad Ali petitioner is concerned, his role is similar to that of Abdul Rashid who has already been allowed bail by this Court in Crl. Misc. 1733-B of 2000, vide order, dated 14-3-2000.
Following the law of consistency this petition is accepted and the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.