PERVAIZ ASLAM and anothers vs THE STATE
This matter concerns two separate bail applications filed by Pervaiz Aslam and Muhammad Rafiq, who were in judicial custody facing allegations related to the theft of forged documents and the possession of incriminating registers. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail given the specific circumstances of their case, including the lack of recovery of incriminating materials and the petitioners' status. The Court held that the petitioners were entitled to bail. The ratio of the decision rests on the absence of recovery of incriminating documents from the petitioners, the fact that one petitioner is a government servant with no prior criminal record, and the ongoing nature of the investigation. The Court granted bail subject to the furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000 each with one surety. The principle laid down is that where incriminating evidence has not been recovered from an accused and the investigation is prolonged, the concession of bail may be granted, provided the court retains the power to cancel such bail if the concession is misused.
- Does the absence of recovery of incriminating documents from an accused provide sufficient grounds for the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Can bail be granted to a government servant with no prior criminal record when the investigation is still in progress?
- Is the concession of bail subject to cancellation by the trial court if the accused misuses the privilege?
ORDER
' This order will dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No,1062-B of 2001 and Criminal Miscellaneous No,1074-B of 2001 respectively filed by Pervaiz Aslam and Muhammad Rafiq petitioners.
2. It is argued that certain forged documents were allegedly stolen by the petitioner Pervaiz Aslam in order to screen and subvert evidence against Abdul Hameed, former M.N.A. According to learned counsel no recovery of any stolen document was effected from him. He is in judicial lock-up. He is a Government servant and does not have any previous criminal record. The investigation is in progress and it is not known how long it will take to conclude the name. The petitioner being a Government servant and no recovery has been effected from him deserve as concession of bail.
3. As regard petitioner Muhammad Rafiq, it is alleged that the registers maintained by him as Stamp Vendor have been recovered from him but no stamp papers which are incriminating documents have been recovered from him.
4. In view of what has been observed above, both the petitioners are admitted to bail on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
5. In case the concession is mis-used, the same may be withdrawn and cancelled by the learned trial Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.