IMTIAZ ALI and another vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a bail petition filed by Imtiaz Ali and another seeking post-arrest bail in a criminal case involving alleged offenses under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to bail when the offenses do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, recoveries have been effected, and they are no longer required for further police investigation. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and held that since none of the charged offenses fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1), Cr.P.C., and the accused are no longer required for investigation purposes, they are entitled to the concession of bail. The key principle laid down is that bail should ordinarily be granted in non-prohibitory offenses where the investigation is complete and the continued incarceration of the accused serves no useful punitive purpose.
- Are offenses under sections 420 and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 bailable?
- Whether bail can be granted when the accused are no longer required for further investigation by the police?
- Does an offense falling outside the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 entitle the accused to bail as a general rule?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ijaz Ali is real brother of lmtiaz Ali, he was not named in the F.I.R., he was implicated later on by the complainant; that offences under sections 420/471, P.P.C. Are bailable while offence under section 468, P.P.C. Is not made out because no forgery has been committed, that petitioners have been sent to judicial lock-up, no more required by the police and that none of the offence falls within the ambit of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that recovery has been effected, challan has been submitted and bail should not be granted.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. None of the offences falls within the ambit of section 497(1), Cr.P.C., recovery has been effected, petitioners have been sent to judicial lockup, no more required by the police for further investigation, therefore, this petition is accepted. Petitioners are allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs,50,000 (Fifty thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court.