2022 P Cr (PLP)
ZUBAIR ANWAR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2022 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ZUBAIR ANWAR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (d) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2022 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (d) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2022 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2022 P Cr (PLP) (ZUBAIR ANWAR and 2 others — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Barrister Danyal Ijaz Chadhar for Petitioner with Petitioner in person.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
For a pre-arrest bail personal appearance of accused (before the Court) was mandatory.
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 147, 149 & 337-L(2)
Murderous assault
Ad interim pre-arrest bail, confirmation of
No specific injury attributed
Probability of false implication
First Information Report (FIR) was lodged with the delay of almost 3 days and no explanation for such inordinate delay had been brought on record
Narration of FIR and evidentiary material collected by the police and presented before High Court showed no specific injury was attributed to the accused rather collective role had been assigned to him
Question as to whether the accused participated in the occurrence in the manner as mentioned in the crime report as well as culpability of the accused were issues, which could best be settled after recording of evidence
Prima facie, the prosecution lacked sufficient incriminating material to connect the accused with the commission of alleged offence and chances of his false implication with deliberation after consultation could not be ruled out
Moreover accused had joined investigation and no useful purpose would be served by sending the accused behind bars
Ad-interim pre-arrest bail granted to accused was confirmed in circumstances.
S. 498
Scope
Concession of pre-arrest bail being an extra ordinary relief was to be granted to protect the innocent from victimization and humiliation of police through abuse of law for ulterior motives.
Ss. 497 & 498
Scope
If an accused person had a good case for post arrest bail then merely at the wish of complainant, he could not be sent behind bars for few days by dismissing his application for pre-arrest bail.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD TARIQ NADEEM, J.
Zubair Anwar petitioner No.1 has not turned up before the Court. This is a pre-arrest bail and personal appearance of the petitioner is mandatory. Therefore, the instant bail petition to his extent is dismissed for non-prosecution and order granting pre-arrest bail to hereby recalled.
2. However, through this petition, Muhammad Sarwar and Dawood Sarwar petitioners supplicate pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 413/2021, dated 28.07.2021 for offences under sections 324, 337-L(ii), 147, 149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Qila Didar Singh, District Gujranwala. Subsequently section 302, P.P.C. was added to the FIR.
3. According to brief charges evened out in the crime report that on 25.07.2021 at 10:15 p.m. while they were armed with their respective weapons i.e Bhughda and Dandas along with their companions formed unlawful assembly and then in prosecution of their common object made murderous assault on complainant and his father Abdul Rasheed as a result of which,. they got injured and thereafter Abdul Rasheed succumbed to the injuries.
4. Contentions heard and record perused.
5. After arguing the case at full length, learned counsel for the petitioner Daud Sarwar wishes to withdraw this petition to his extent. 5.(sic.) Dismissed as withdrawn. Order granting pre-arrest bail is hereby recalled to extent of petitioner No.3.
6. So far as case of Muhammad Sarwar petitioner is concerned, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has straightaway been noticed by this Court that the occurrence in this case took place on 25.07.2021, whereas, the FIR was lodged on 28.07.2021, i.e. with the delay of almost 3 days and no explanation for such inordinate delay has been brought on record, therefore, chances of petitioner's false implication with deliberation after consultation cannot be ruled out. Reliance is placed upon the case law titled as "Khair Muhammad and another v. The State through PG Punjab and another" (2021 SCMR 130).
7. After going through the narration of FIR and evidentiary material collected by the Police and presented before this Court, it divulges from record that no specific injury is attributed to the petitioner rather collective role has been assigned to him.
8. From overall analysis of the prosecution case, it manifests that whether the petitioner participated in occurrence in the manner as mentioned in the crime report as well as culpability of the petitioner is an issue, to be best settled after recording of evidence. The above facts lead me to draw an inference that prima facie, the prosecution lacks sufficient incriminating material to connect the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence and chances of petitioner's false implication with deliberation after consultation cannot be ruled out. The concession of pre-arrest bail being an extra ordinary relief is to be granted to protect the innocent person from the victimization and humiliation of police though abuse of law for ulterior motive. In the light of facts highlighted above, chances of petitioner's false implication cannot be ruled out. Even otherwise, if an accused person has a good case for post arrest bail mere at the wish of complainant, he cannot be sent behind the bars for few days by dismissing his application for pre-arrest bail. Reliance is placed upon the cases titled as "Khalil Ahmed Soomro v. The State" (PLD 2017 SC 730), and "Shahzada Qaiser Arfat alias Qaiser v. The State and another" (PLD 2021 SC 708).
9. Petitioner has joined the investigation, no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars. 10, For the above reasons, this petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner Muhammad Sarwar is confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
11. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein above are tentative in nature, and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition. MWA/Z-25/L Bail confirmed.