2010 PLP 1784 (YLR)

SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.

Granted subject to all just exceptions.

2. Applicants seek bail in Crime No.371/2009 for the offence under sections 448, 504, 506, 34, P.P.C., of Police Station Nazimabad. The precise allegations against the applicants/accused as levelled by the complainant are that the accused No.1 is his son whereas, accused No.2 is his grandson who have occupied his shop and when the complainant asked them to vacate, the accused No.2 (grandson) took out the pistol and threatened the complainant that in case he returns at the shop he shall be murdered. The applicants moved an application seeking bail before arrest before the trial Court which was dismissed. Thereafter the Investigating Officer filed Challan wherein, the accused were charged under sections 448, 504, 506, 34, P.P.C., and the provisions of section 506-B, P.P.C., were deleted. The applicants thereafter moved second bail before arrest application and sought bail on the ground that all the offences with which the applicants are charged are bailable and therefore, they are entitled to the bail but their application was again rejected by the V-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi Central vide Order dated 4-12-2009 against which the applicants have moved the instant bail application. Learned Counsel for the applicants has reiterated his submission that since all offences with which the applicants are charged are bailable, therefore, they are entitled to bail as a matter of right. Per learned counsel bail application of the applicants was rejected by the Court below on the ground that "In bailable offences it is not incumbent upon the Court to grant bail to the applicants/accused", which is totally against the law and if bail applications are rejected on such ground it will not only cause hardship to the accused person but will unnecessary add the burden of this Court. On the other hand learned Additional Prosecutor-General without denying such position has pointed out that since earlier bail before arrest application moved on behalf of the applicants was rejected, therefore, the second bail application was also rejected as there was no new ground. I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record. It appears that the F.I.R., was registered under sections 448, 504, 506-B, 34, P.P.C., and thereafter the police filed challan on 19-11-2009 after deleting section 506-B, P.P.C. In the circumstances, the earlier order whereby the first bail application of the applicants was rejected in my view does not come in the way of the applicants as at that point of time the applicants were charged with a non-bailable offence and the applicants were seeking a concession. However, after deletion of non-bailable provision the applicants were entitled to bail as of a right under the provision of section 496, Cr.P.C. In view of this position the observation of the trial Court to the effect that "in bailable offences it is not incumbent upon the Court to grant bail to the applicants/accused" are not only against the mandatory provisions of section 496, Cr.P.C. but also against Clause (1) of Chapter "D" of National Judicial Policy which directs expeditious disposal of the case. The relevant portion of National Judicial Policy for the sake of convenience is reproduced as under:

"In bailable cases, grant of bail is a statutory right of the accused, therefore, the court before which the accused appears or is brought may immediately release him on bail, subject to furnishing of sureties as provided under section 496, Cr.P.C." Perhaps Mr. Sikandar Ali Lashari, V-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi Central by declining bail in a bailable case has not only ignored the provisions of section 496, Cr.P.C. but also has not adhered to the commands provided in the National Judicial Policy. In the circumstances and for what has been discussed above, the interim pre arrest bail granted to the applicants by this Court vide Order dated 7-12-2009 is confirmed on the same terms and conditions and the V-Additional Sessions Judge Karachi Central is directed to be careful in future. H.B.T./M-75/K Bail confirmed.