GHULAM RABBANI alias BANI vs THE STATE
This is a criminal petition for post-arrest bail arising from F.I.R. No. 232 of 2000 registered under Section 324/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Satiana, District Faisalabad. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail in view of an unexplained seventeen-day delay in lodging the F.I.R., his alleged innocence during investigation, and the applicability of further inquiry provisions. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and granted bail to the petitioner, holding that the unexplained delay casts doubt on the prosecution case and that reasonable grounds to believe the accused is guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life do not prima facie exist, bringing the case within the purview of further inquiry under subsection (2) of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The key principle laid down is that an unexplained delay in lodging the F.I.R., coupled with the absence of reasonable grounds connecting the accused to a prohibitory clause offence, entitles an accused person to post-arrest bail under the further inquiry rule.
- Whether an unexplained delay of seventeen days in lodging the F.I.R. casts doubt on the veracity of the prosecution case for the purpose of bail?
- Does a case fall within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when reasonable grounds do not prima facie exist to believe the accused committed an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life?
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when declared innocent during the police investigation and where delay exists in reporting the crime?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Ghulam Rabbani petitioner aged about 22 years was arrested on the 12th of June, 2000 and is in jail eversince awaiting his trial in pursuance of a case registered vide F.I.R. No.232 of 2000, dated the 1st of June, 2000, under section 324/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Satiana, District Faisalabad, regarding an occurrence which allegedly took place night between 18/19th of May, 2000, in the area of Chak No.37/G.B. Which is at a distance of about two and a half kilometers from Police Station Satiana, District Faisalabad, where the F.I.R. Was lodged on the 1st of June, 2000 after 17 days of the occurrence by one Rana Mahboob Alain, father of Sultan Mehmood injured, alleging inter alia that the petitioner fired at Sultan Mehmood which hit him on the left flank and left arm.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is a fit case for the grant of bail because there is a delay of 17 days in lodging the F.I.R.; that the case against the petitioner is matter of further inquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) of section.497, Cr.P.C. And lastly the petitioner is declared to be innocent during the investigation.
3. Learned counsel for the State as also for the complainant vehemently opposes the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R.; that the challan has been submitted in the Court and three eyewitnesses have been recorded.
4. Apart from the unexplained delay of 17 days in lodging the F.I.R. Which per se casts a doubt on the veracity of the entire prosecution case, the only role attributed to the petitioner is that he fired at Sultan Mehmood which hit him on the left flank and left arm. Thus, reasonable grounds within the meaning of subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. To believe that the petitioner is guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years, prima facie, do not seem to exist. However, the case against the petitioner may be a matter of further inquiry within the meaning of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Which entitles him to the grant of bail.
3. Resultantly, this petition is accepted and the petitioner is granted bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- Sayed KARIM SHAH Versus State 2021 PCrLJN 10