MUHAMMAD ARSHAD and another vs THE STATE
Petitioners sought pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 18 of 2004 registered under Section 161 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 at Police Station FIA, Crime Circle, Lahore, on allegations of receiving illegal gratification as WAPDA employees. The core legal question was whether the petitioners made out a case for pre-arrest bail in light of the complainant's affidavits stating that the petitioners were not involved and were named due to a misunderstanding. The Lahore High Court held that the complainant's affidavits regarding mistaken identity made out a case for pre-arrest bail. The court confirmed the ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners, establishing the principle that pre-arrest bail may be confirmed when the complainant disowns the allegations through affidavits during investigation.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted when the complainant submits an affidavit stating the accused were named due to misunderstanding?
- Does an affidavit by the complainant disowning the allegations justify confirming pre-arrest bail?
- Section 161, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
ORDER
' Petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.18 of 2004, dated 13-3-2004 under section 161, P.P.C.
Read with section 5(2), P.C.A., 1947 registered at Police Station FIA, Crime Circle, Lahore.
2. In nutshell the allegation against the petitioners is that they being WAPDA employees received Rs.9,000 in different instalments from Shaukat Ali (complainant) as illegal gratification for installing Industrial Electricity Connection.
3. Heard. File perused.
' Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed on record an affidavit of the complainant wherein he has stated that he paid illegal gratification to one Arshad and prese4t petitioner is not the same person. Record of the case produced by they learned Law Officer reveals that during the investigation complainant has also filed an affidavit before the agency stating therein that he named both the petitioners due to misunderstanding and he has forgiven them.
4. In the light of the affidavits of the complainant who seems to be a man of dubious character, case of the petitioners for the grant of pre-arrest bail is made out. Accordingly without further dilating upon the factual aspect of the case, this petition is allowed and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners vide order, dated 1-4-2004 stands confirmed against the same surety bonds.
Pre-arrest .
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE Versus State 2006 YLR 2905