2025 PLP 1509 (SCMR)
Hafiz FARHAT ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE through Prosecutor General Punjab, Lahore and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2025 PLP 1509 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Naeem Akhter Afghan Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar and Ishtiaq Ibrahim, JJ |
| Parties | Hafiz FARHAT ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE through Prosecutor General Punjab, Lahore and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2025 PLP 1509 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2025 PLP 1509 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Naeem Akhter Afghan Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar and Ishtiaq Ibrahim, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2025 PLP 1509 (SCMR) (Hafiz FARHAT ABBAS — Petitioner Versus The STATE through Prosecutor General Punjab, Lahore and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Petitioner in person along with Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Muhammad Shahbaz Ali Khan Khosa, Advocate Supreme Court assisted by: Mustehsan Raza Awan, Advocate for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against Order dated 03.10.2024 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. Misc. No. 49721-B of 2024).
Ss. 497(2) & 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 395, 436, 427, 290, 291, 337-L(2), 109, 120-D, 121, 121-A, 131, 146, 153, 153-A, 153-B, 505, 148, 149 & 34
Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7
Attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, dacoity, mischief by fire and explosive substance, causing damage or loss of fifty rupees or more through mischief, public nuisance, hurt, abetment, criminal conspiracy, attempt to wage war, attempting to seduce a soldier, rioting, giving provocation with intent to cause riot, promoting enmity between different groups, public mischief, rioting armed with deadly weapons, unlawful assembly, common intention, act of terrorism
Pre-arrest bail, confirmation of
Admittedly the petitioner had not been nominated in FIR for the occurrence of 9th May, 2023
Petitioner had been implicated in the supplementary statement of the complainant on the basis of tweets/audio/video clips on social media
Evidentiary value, as well as admissibility of the delayed supplementary statement of the complainant, as well as the tweets/audio/video clips on social media shall be determined at the trial after recording evidence
No recovery had been effected from the petitioner
Record revealed that the petitioner had co-operated with investigation of the case
Prosecution had yet to prove the allegation of hatching criminal conspiracy by the petitioner at the trial
Apprehension of the petitioner about his arrest by the police to create humiliation and harassment despite cooperating with investigation of the case could not be held to be vague or baseless
On the basis of tentative assessment of the material so far available on record, the case against the petitioner also fell within the ambit of further inquiry
For the same allegation co-accused had already been granted pre-arrest bail by the Supreme Court
On the basis of rule of consistency as well, the petitioner was held entitled for confirmation of his ad-interim pre-arrest bail
Petition was converted into appeal and same was accepted
Ad-interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner earlier was confirmed, in circumstances. Zulfiqar Abbas Naqvi, Special Prosecutor, Punjab, Tariq Siddique, Additional Prosecutor General, Punjab and Dr. Javaid Asif, DSP and Zahid Saleem, Inspector for the State.
Judgment & Decree
NAEEM AKHTER AFGHAN, J.
After refusal of pre-arrest bail by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore vide order dated 3rd October, 2024, the petitioner has surrendered before this Court for grant of pre-arrest bail under sections 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 (the Act), 324, 395, 436, 427, 290, 291, 148, 149, 337-L(2), 34, 109, 120-D, 121, 121-A, 131, 146, 153, 153-A, 153-B and 505 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (P.P.C.) in FIR No. 103/2023 lodged with police station (PS) Sarwar Road, District Lahore on 12th May 2023 for the occurrence of 9th May, 2023.
2. The petitioner was granted ad-interim pre-arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 15th April, 2025 subject to his furnishing personal surety of Rs.50,000/- with the Additional Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has not been nominated in the FIR; he was implicated in supplementary statement of the complainant with noticeable delay with the allegation of hatching criminal conspiracy for the occurrence of 9th May 2023; the petitioner has cooperated with investigation as and when required; nothing incriminating is on record to connect the petitioner with the alleged offences; despite cooperating with the investigation, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest by the police out of malice and ulterior motives to create harassment.
4. While opposing the confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail of the petitioner, learned Special Prosecutor, Punjab stated that on the basis of sufficient incriminating material available on record, which was collected after registration of the FIR, the petitioner was implicated in supplementary statement by the complainant as the tweets/audio/video clips on social media incriminated the petitioner in the occurrence of 9th May, 2023; there is no mala fide on the part of the police; the incriminating material available on record prima facie connects the petitioner with commission of non-bailable heinous offences.
5. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Special Prosecutor, Punjab we have perused the available record. Admittedly the petitioner has not been nominated in FIR No. 103/2023 lodged with PS Sarwar Road, Lahore on 12th May 2023 for the occurrence of 9th May 2023. The petitioner has been implicated in the supplementary statement of the complainant dated 10th June 2023 on the basis of tweets/audio/video clips on social media; the evidentiary value, as well as admissibility of the delayed supplementary statement of the complainant, as well as the tweets/audio/video clips on social media shall be determined at the trial after recording evidence.
6. No recovery has been effected from petitioner. Record reveals that the petitioner has co-operated with investigation of the case. The prosecution has yet to prove the allegation of hatching criminal conspiracy by the petitioner at the trial. The apprehension of the petitioner about his arrest by the police to create humiliation and harassment despite cooperating with investigation of the case cannot be held as vague or baseless. On the basis of tentative assessment of the material so far available on record, the case against the petitioner also falls within the ambit of further inquiry.
7. For the same allegation co-accused Imtiaz Mehmood has already been granted pre-arrest bail by this Court in FIR No. 103/2023, PS, Sarwar Road, Lahore vide order dated 17th April, 2025 passed in Criminal Petition No. 1165/2024. On the basis of rule of consistency as well, the petitioner is held entitled for confirmation of his ad-interim pre-arrest bail.
8. For the above reasons, while granting leave, the petition is converted into appeal and same is accepted. The ad-interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated 15th April, 2025 is hereby confirmed.
9. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with further investigation, if and when required.
10. The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and same shall not influence merits of the case at the trial. JK/F-7/SC Bail confirmed.