ALLAH BAKSH and others vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a post-arrest bail petition filed by Allah Baksh and Shakoor, who were implicated in a criminal case registered under sections 395, 397, 412, and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code and section 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, at Police Station Chatiana District Toba Tek Singh. The prosecution alleged that armed intruders entered the complainant's house, assaulted a family member, confined them, and looted cash, gold ornaments, and firearms, while making political remarks. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to post-arrest bail in the absence of incriminating material connecting them to the crime. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and held that since there was absolute lack of legal evidence to connect the petitioners with the alleged occurrence and they had no prior criminal record, the concession of bail could not be withheld. The key principle laid down is that post-arrest bail will be granted where the prosecution record discloses no legal evidence connecting the accused to the crime and the accused have no previous criminal involvement.
- Whether post-arrest bail should be granted when the prosecution record contains no legal evidence connecting the accused to the alleged occurrence?
- Does the absence of any prior criminal record weigh in favor of granting bail to an accused in a dacoity case?
- Can bail be withheld when there are no reasonable grounds to believe the accused committed the charged offense?
- Section 395, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 397, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 412, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 17, Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' Allah Baksh and Shakoor petitioners have applied for bail after arrest in a case registered at Police Station Chatiana District Toba Tek Singh on 15-6-2001. Under sections 395, 397, 412. 109, P.P.C. And section 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. The prosecution case is that on the night between 14/15-6-2001, 8/10 unidentified persons armed with different kinds of weapons entered into the house of the. Complainant, who was steeping in the courtyard alongwith his family mem1-2rs. Muhammad Riaz was physically assaulted and injured. Thereafter, he alongwith other family members was confined in the drawing room. Two persons remained on guard, while the remaining accused searched the house. They took ornaments of gold and a cash of Rs, 3,75,000 two .7MM. Rifles with 300 pellets and a .12 bore licensed gun of the complainant and a .32 bore pistol belonging to his father. The culprits told the complainant that he had contested elections against him. He also inquired about the mobile telephone. The accused then left the house after making reckless firing. The matter was reported to the police on the following morning at 7-0 a.m. Allah Baldish and his son Shakoor were arrested on 29-6-2001 and sent to judicial lock-up on 30-6-2001.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has taken me through the record. There is absolutely no legal evidence to connect the petitioners with the alleged occurrence. The petitioners have never been involved in any criminal case. I find no reason to withhold the concession of bail, therefore, this petition is allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be enlarged on bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,100,000 (Rupees one lac) each with one surety each in the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.