MUMTAZ AHMAD vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused, Mumtaz Ahmad, in connection with F.I.R. No. 37 of 2002, registered under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was involved in the transportation of 15 drums of alcohol, although he was not named in the initial F.I.R. and was not apprehended at the scene. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated through a supplementary statement recorded 17 days after the incident, that no recovery was made from him, and that he had been incarcerated for six months as a first-time offender. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances of his implication and the nature of the offence. The Court held that the offence did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. Consequently, the Court granted post-arrest bail, emphasizing the petitioner's status as a previous non-convict and the duration of his pre-trial detention.
- Does an offence under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
- Is a petitioner entitled to post-arrest bail if they were not named in the initial F.I.R. and were implicated only through a delayed supplementary statement?
- Article 3, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Article 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Mumtaz Ahmad petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.37 of 2002 dated 6-4-2002 under Articles 3/4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order No.4/1979, Police Station Delhi Gate, Multan.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as contained in the F.I.R. Is that on 6-4-2002 at about 2-15 a.m.
Muhammad Imran, Rana Mushtaq, Asif son of Ghaffar and Muhammad Asif son of Abdullah have transported 15 drums of Alcohol to Multan in Truck No.2773/MNF driven by Muhammad Sajjad, out of them, Muhammad Asif son of Abdullah, Muhammad Imran and Muhammad Sajjad were apprehended with those drums.
3. It has been contended on his behalf that he has falsely been roped in that he is not named in the F.I.R. That he was not apprehended at the spot; that no recovery was effected from him; that subsequently after the delay of about 17 days in the supplementary statement he has been involved in the instant case; that he is behind the bars for the last about six months; and that he is previous non-convict.
4. On the other hand learned counsel for the State has opposed the application.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions advanced from both the sides with the help of record.
6. The offence under Articles 3/4 of the aforesaid Order does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. (petitioner) is behind the bars for the last about six months and is previous non- convict, I, therefore, accept this petition and admitting him to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.