MUHAMMAD SHAFIQUE vs THE SATE
The petitioner Muhammad Shafique sought post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 97 of 2001 registered under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 at Police Station Haram Gate, Multan. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given the circumstances of the recovery and the completion of the investigation. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail as investigation against him was complete, he was no longer required for investigative purposes, all recovery witnesses were police officials without justification for violating section 103 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, and the alleged offense did not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The court laid down the principle that post-arrest bail may be granted when further detention serves no useful purpose and the case does not fall within the prohibitory clause of the relevant statutory provisions.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail when the investigation is complete and he is no longer required for further investigation?
- Does an offense under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 under the circumstances of this case?
- What is the effect of non-compliance with the provisions of section 103 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 when all recovery witnesses are police officials?
- Article 3/4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 103, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Muhammad Shafiq, petitioner, has sought his post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No,97 of 2001, dated 17-7-2001 under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, registered at Police Station Harm Gate, Multan.
2. According to the F.I.R., the complainant Muzaffar Hussain, A.S.-I., was on patrol duty alongwith nine other police officials in the vicinity of Chowk Haram Gate, when he received a secret information that three persons were in possession of three boxes containing the liquor. After receipt of the said information three other police officials also joined the complainant and all the 13 police officials reached the place of occurrence. The accused, who were three in number, allegedly threw the boxes and try to run away. Out of all the three accused, 13 police officials succeeded in catching hold of the petitioner. However, the other two made good their escape.
3. According to the F.I.R., 90 bottles of liquor were recovered from the boxes, out of which three bottles/cuppies were sent to the Chemical Examiner. The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. It has been noticed that so far the remaining two accused have not been arrested. Neither the report under section 173, Cr.P.C./Challan has been prepared and forwarded to the Court for the purpose of trial.
So far as the petitioner is concerned, investigation against him has already been completed. He is no more required for the purpose of investigation. Neither his further detention in jail would advance the case of the prosecution in any manner. All the witnesses mentioned in the F.I.R. And also the recovery witnesses are the police officials. No reason has been advanced that as to why the provisions of section 103, Cr.P.C. Have been violated. None of the offences, in the circumstances, of the case, falls within the mischief of the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. For what has been discussed above, I am inclined to admit the petitioner to bail, subject to his tendering bail bonds in the sum of Rs,fifty thousand with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Judge.
6. Disposed of.