GHAFFAR AHMAD And 2 Others vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition filed by Ghaffar Ahmad and two others seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 300 registered under Section 298-C, Pakistan Penal Code at Police Station Saddar, Chichawatni, District Sahiwal. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to post-arrest bail given that the offense carries a maximum punishment of three years and does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition and admitted the petitioners to bail. The Court held that since the offense does not attract the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure, the grant of bail is the general rule and its refusal is an exception. Furthermore, the Court noted the existence of prior civil litigation indicating potential mala fide, the generalized nature of the allegations in the F.I.R., the submission of the challan, and the principle that bail should not be withheld as a form of premature punishment.
- Whether bail should be granted when an offense does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
- Does the pendency of prior civil litigation between the parties support a finding of mala fide in the registration of a criminal case for the purpose of bail?
- Whether the submission of a challan and completion of investigation render the continued custody of petitioners unnecessary?
- Section 298-C, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Through this petition Ghaffar Ahmad, Illyas Ahmad and Manzoor Ahmad petitioners have sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 300 registered at Police Station Saddar, Chichawatni, District Sahiwal on 19-8-2000 for an offence under section 298-C, P.P.C.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed that in the F.I.R. No particular date or time of occurrence had been fixed by the complainant. The F.I.R. As well as the affidavits appended herewith as its Annexures contained generalized allegations without specifics. The concerned petitioner categorically denies signing the relevant admission form of his son which allegedly was signed by him about thirteen years prior to registration of the F.I.R. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner civil litigation has been pending between the petitioners and the complainant and, therefore, the present F.I.R. Was an outcome of mala fide on the part of the complainant on account of the, background of bitterness and ill-will between the parties. It is not disputeu that an offence under section 298-C, P.P.C. Carries a maximum punishment of three year's imprisonment and, therefore, the same does not attract the prohibitory clause contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. In cases not attracting the above mentioned prohibitory clause grant of bail is a rule and its refusal merely an exception: A reference in this regard has been made by the learned counsel for the petitioners to the cases of Nasir Ahmad v. The State (1993 SCM R 153), Tariq Bashir and 5 others v. The State (PLD 1995 SC 34) and Khawar Fareed v. The State (2000 YLR 425). The chalan in this case has already been submitted after completion of investigation and, therefore, continued custody of the petitioners in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage. It is trite law that the concession of bail ought not to be withheld by way of premature punishment.
3. For what has been discussed above this petition is allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.