KHIZER ABBAS And Other vs THE STATE
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from FIR No. 407 registered at Police Station, City Mian Channu, District Khanewal, concerning alleged offences under sections 381-A and 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioners sought bail on the grounds that they were not nominated in the FIR, no eyewitnesses observed the theft, and no test identification parade was conducted to implicate them. Furthermore, the recovery of the stolen motorcycle occurred approximately two years after the alleged incident. The court considered that the offence under section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Additionally, as the investigation was concluded, continued incarceration served no beneficial purpose. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and admitted the petitioners to bail, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds, holding that in the absence of incriminating evidence and given the nature of the offence, the petitioners were entitled to the concession of bail.
- Does an offence under section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the absence of a test identification parade a relevant factor in granting post-arrest bail when the accused were not nominated in the FIR?
- Section 381-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.- Through this petition Khizer Abbas and Ghulam Hur petitioners have sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 407 registered at Police Station, City Mian Channu, District Khanewal on 10.12.1997 for offences under sections 381-A/411, PPC.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed that both the petitioners have not been .Nominated in the FIR and nobody had seen them stealing the motorcycle of the complainant. Admittedly no test identification parade had been held in this case so as to positively implicate the petitioners in the there in question. The motor- cycle of the complainant had allegedly been recovered in this case after about two years of the alleged theft. An offence under section 411, PPC does not attract the prohibitory clause contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. "The investigation in this case has already been concluded and, thus, continued Physical custody of the petitioners in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
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 one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.