SULTAN alias BABLI vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a criminal bail petition filed by Sultan alias Babli, who sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under sections 337-F(i), 337-F(iii), 337-F(vi), 337-L(ii), 147, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail considering the four-day delay in lodging the F.I.R. and the fact that the alleged offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Court held that since the offences did not fall within the prohibitory clause and the delay of four days remained unexplained, casting doubt on the prosecution's case, the petitioner's case was fit for the grant of bail. The Court reaffirmed the principle that in offences not falling within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the grant of bail is the rule and its refusal is an exception.
- Whether delay in lodging the F.I.R. without explanation casts doubt on the veracity of the prosecution case?
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when the alleged offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the grant of bail in offences not falling within the prohibitory clause constitute a general rule with refusal as an exception?
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(vi), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Sultan alias Babli petitioner aged about 20 years, was arrested on the 14th of August, 2000 and is in jail eversince awaiting his trial in pursuance of a case registered against him and five others vide F.I.R. No,213 of 2000, dated the 19th of July, 2000, under sections 337-F(i)/(iii)/(vi)/337-L(ii)/147 and 149, P.P.C. At Police Station Sadar, District Sargodha, regarding an occurrence which allegedly took place on the 15th of July, 2000 at 6-30 p.m. In the area of Chak No,88 which is at a distance of about nine kilometres from Police Station Saddar, District Sargodha, where the F.I.R. Was lodged after four days on the 19th of July, 2000 by Zafar Iqbal, an uncle of Umar Draz who was caused injury by the accused person.
2. The allegation against Sultan alias Babli petitioner is that he was armed with Sota with which he caused an injury on the right calf of Umar Draz.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is a delay of four days in lodging the F.I.R.
And that the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner does not fall within the prohibition contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. And, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the challan has been submitted; that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. And specific role has been assigned to him and, therefore, is not entitled to the grant of bail.
5. Admittedly, there is a delay of four days in lodging the F.I.R. For which there is no explanation and which tends to cast a doubt on the veracity of the prosecution case. Be that as it may, the offences allegedly committed by the petitioner do not fall within the prohibition contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. And the grant of bail in such cases is the rule and refusal is an exception as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Tariq Bashir v. The State reported in PLD 1995 SC 34.
6. Resultantly, this petition is accepted and Sultan alias Babli 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.