2026 PLP 1091 (YLR)

Ali Baig, C.J.

Through this single judgment I intend to dispose of the above cited three bail petitions bearing No. Cr. Misc No. 561/2025, Cr. Misc. No. 562/2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 563/2025 as the same are outcome of one and the same FIR.

2. The instant petitions under section 497 Cr.P.C have been filed by the present petitioners/accused against the impugned judgment/order dated 07-11-2025 passed by the learned Vacations Sessions Judge Gilgit in Bail Application No.52/2025 whereby the learned Vacations Sessions Judge Gilgit has dismissed the post arrest bail petition of the present petitioners/ accused.

3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that during bid opening process of timber by the Forest Department at Naltar, the present petitioners/accused and 33 other accused persons in furtherance of their common intention attacked on Government Officials who were deputed for conducting the bidding process of dead fallen trees to overawe and obstruct them from discharging their official duties and caused serious injuries to some Government officials. On written complaint of complainant the FIR bearing No. 09/2025 was registered at P.S Nomal District Gilgit against the present petitioners/accused and their co-accused for the offences under sections 147, 186, 144, 148, 160, 342, 353, 506, 506 (11), 500, 337-A, 337-F P.P.C.

4. After registration of aforesaid FIR the concerned SHO arrested the present accused/petitioners along with their co-accused and after completion of formal investigation, the SHO discharged some of the co-accused of the present petitioners/accused under section 169 Cr.P.C and the present petitioners/ accused and some other co-accused were got committed to judicial custody. The petitioners/accused had filed post arrest bail application in the Court of learned Vacations Sessions Judge, Gilgit which was dismissed to the extent of present petitioners /accused vide order dated 07-11-2025, hence, this bail petition.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused submitted that the petitioners/accused are students of KIU and have malafidly been involved in the instant case. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused further submitted that the offences reflected in the FIR are bailable except offence under section 506(ii) Cr.P.C which does riot attract to the instant case and does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused further submitted the co-accused namely Javed and Kumail having similar role have been released on bail by the learned Duty Sessions Judge Gilgit hence, rule of consistency applies to the case of the present petitioners/accused. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused further submitted that no recovery has been effected from the possession of the present petitioners/ accused. The learned counsel for the petitioners/ accused further submitted that the petitioners/ accused are neither previously convicted persons nor habitual offenders. The learned counsel for the petitioners/ accused further submitted that case of the petitioners/accused requires further inquiry. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused further submitted that there is 06 hours delay in lodging of FIR, which creates serious doubts. The learned counsel for the petitioners/accused lastly submitted that by accepting this petition the accused/petitioners may kindly be released on bail to meet the ends of justice. In support of their arguments the learned counsel for the petitioners/ accused relied on the following case law:- 2010 PCr.LJ 1917 Karachi

6. On the other hand, the learned Dy.A.G and L.A for the respondent/State controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners/accused by contending that the petitioners are directly nominated in the FIR with specific role. The offence under section 506 (ii) is not bailable. The learned Dy.A.G and L.A for the respondent/State further submitted that the prosecution has collected sufficient material to connect the accused/petitioners with the alleged crime during investigation. The learned Dy.A.G and L.A further submitted that the accused/petitioners attacked on the Government Officials intentionally with pre-plan, hence, they are not entitled for any leniency. The learned Dy.A.G and L.A for the respondent/State lastly argued that the instant bail petition may be dismissed to meet the ends of justice.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and also gone through the record of the case with their able assistance.

8. From perusal of record it reveals that total 36 persons were nominated in the FIR. Out of 36 persons/accused some co-accused of the present petitioners have been discharged by the prosecution under section 169 Cr.P.C and some co-accused have been released on bail by the learned Duty Sessions Judge Gilgit vide bail order dated 07-11-2025, particularly co-accused namely Javed and Kumail had been attributed similar role in the FIR who have been released on bail by the learned Duty Sessions Judge Gilgit vide aforesaid referred bail order. Hence, rule of consistency applies to the case of present petitioners/accused. There is also six hours delay in lodging of FIR which creates doubt regarding involvement of the petitioners/accused in the instant case.

9. Moreover, all offences reelected in the FIR are bailable except offence under section 506 (ii) P.P.C. which too does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C, thus grant of bail in such like offence is rule and refusal is an exception. Furthermore the investigation of the case has been completed and the petitioners/accused are no more required for further investigation. The petitioners /accused are KIU students and their detention in prison for indefinite period would not service any useful purpose, rather their studies would be suffered.

10. In view of above discussion I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners/accused have been able to make out a case for grant of bail in their favour. Accordingly these petitions are allowed and the petitioners /accused are admitted to post arrest bail subject to their furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 200,000/- (Two lacs) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. Certified true copy of this order be placed on the files of Cr. Misc. bearing No. 562/2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 563/2025.

11. The observations made herein above are tentative in nature and will not influence the Trial Court during trial of the case of the present petitioners/ accused. JK/16/GB. Petitions allowed.