MUHAMMAD IMRAN ASHRAF vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a bail petition filed by Muhammad Imran Ashraf against The State, reported as 2002 YLR 729(1). The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner's plea that the factory where the alleged gas theft occurred was leased out to another person at the relevant time entitles him to confirmation of bail on the grounds of further inquiry. The court held that since the case was open to further inquiry and the confirmation of bail was not contested by the respondent-State, the interim bail granted to the petitioner should be confirmed. The key principle laid down is that where the accused raises a plausible plea of alibi or non-possession of the premises at the time of the alleged offence, and the state does not contest the matter, interim bail may be confirmed pending further inquiry.
- Whether pre-arrest or interim bail can be confirmed when the accused claims the premises were leased out to another person at the time of the alleged offence?
- Does a lack of contest by the respondent-State facilitate the confirmation of interim bail?
- When is a criminal case considered open to further enquiry for the purpose of granting bail?
ORDER
1. Argues that in fact the petitioner had leased out the factory to Malik Muhammad Saleem etc. On the relevant time. When the alleged theft of Gas occurred, the factory was not with the petitioner. It is therefore, argued that case against the petitioner is open to further enquiry. The confirmation of bail has not been contested by the 'respondent-State. The interim bail already granted to the petitioner is, therefore, confirmed on his furnishing fresh bail bond in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
2. Interim .