Release of accused on bail

2022 PLD 440 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 9(b), 18(e) & 24(a)Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 91, 204 & 497Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199Release of accused on bailWarrants of arrest, non-issuance ofExecution of bond to appearScope

Petitioners were accused persons facing proceedings under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, who sought their release on bail after execution of bond under S.91, Cr.P.C. for their appearance in Court

Validity

Process to cause attendance of accused after filing of Reference was issued in terms of S.204, Cr.P.C.

Offences under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999,were non-bailable and Court had no authority to attend to a question of bail and consider existence or otherwise of reasonable grounds against accused for such relief

Court was to issue warrants in first instance and on appearance of accused commit him to custody

In certain cases Court could incline to think it fit to adopt different course in non bailable offences and issue summons instead to secure attendance of accused

In NAB cases with sufficient material connecting accused with alleged offence, were at least not the ones justifying approval of such a step to seek his presence through

After accused appeared voluntarily or in compliance of such process, Accountability Court could not release him on his mere willingness to execute a bond under S.91, Cr.P.C. undertaking to appear on next date

Court was to commit accused to custody till his acquittal by it or till in his favour a bail granting order was delivered by High Court or by Supreme Court

Non-issuance of a direction/warrants against accused by Chairman NAB, for any reason including his being on pre-arrest bail granted to him during enquiry or investigation (subsequently recalled), whose authority was to last only till filing of the reference, was not a legal bar for Accountability Court to exercise jurisdiction otherwise bestowed on it by Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, to regulate appearance of accused accordingly

High Court directed the office to fix Constitutional petitions filed by petitioners seeking bail in circumstances.

2022 PLD 440 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 9(b), 18(e) & 24(a)Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss.91, 204 & 497Release of accused on bailWarrants of arrest, non-issuance ofExecution of bond to appearScope

Petitioners were accused persons facing proceedings under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, who sought their release on bail after execution of bond under S.91 Cr.P.C. for their appearance in Court

Validity

Accused under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, against whom Chairman NAB did not issue any permission/direction to arrest, but against whom reference was filed, when such accused had appeared or was brought before Accountability Court pursuant to a process issued under S.204, Cr.P.C., whether summons, bailable warrants or non-bailable warrants, such accused was required by the Court to execute a bond with or without sureties under S.91, Cr.P.C. to assure his appearance before the Court

Power under S.91, Cr.P.C. was not available for an accused who appeared before Accountability Court on bail, except where he was on bail against warrants issued to compel his appearance in Court

If accused under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999,was denied pre-arrest bail, such accused was exposed to arrest by NAB either under S.24(a) National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, if such direction had been issued prior to the Reference, or under S.24(c) National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, if a direction for his arrest was given after the Reference

If accused was so arrested then S.91, Cr.P.C. was not available when accused was brought before Accountability Court

On rejection of petition for pre-arrest bail, if there was no direction for arrest pending under S.24(a) National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, nor was one subsequently issued under S.24(c) National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, such accused was required by Accountability Court to execute a bond with or without sureties under S.91, Cr.P.C. to assure his appearance before the Court.

2020 YLR 1474 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court Judicial Precedent

S. 426Suspension of sentence pending appealRelease of accused on bailScope

Accused sought suspension of sentence passed under S.302(c), P.P.C. for imprisonment of five years and was also sentenced to imprisonment for six months under Ss.459 & 506(b), P.P.C.

Accused had already undergone the sentences awarded to him under Ss.506(b) & 459, P.P.C.; he had also undergone the major portion of the sentence awarded to him under S.302(c), P.P.C. and if the remissions under Jail Manual were counted then he would almost have undergone the entire sentences

Hearing of the appeal might take some time, therefore, convict was entitled to be released on bail by suspending his sentence

Petition under S. 426, Cr.P.C. was allowed.

2017 PLD 67 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Ss. 498, 499, 500 & 502Release of accused on bailReturn of surety documentsScopeSecurity offered by the surety was under process but he filed application for return of surety documentsValidity

Release of accused was subject to execution of bond by the accused himself or by one or more sureties to the satisfaction of court or police officer

Written declaration even on oath that one was ready/prepared to stand surety for an accused would not dress him up as 'surety' nor it would be sufficient for release of accused on bail

Release of accused on bail would be handing over the accused in the custody of surety under certain terms and conditions

Mere offer would create no liability upon its maker unless accepted and parties thereto proceeded further

Offer to stand surety should not only be accepted by the court but such agreement had to be followed by execution of bond

Such offer could not be taken as 'bond'

Satisfaction of court would include identification of surety and verification of his/her documents offered as security

Surety furnishing affidavit his role would commence from the acceptance of surety and execution of bond (offer) which, in the present case, had not been accepted by the court

Accused had not been handed over into the hands of surety in circumstances

Application for return of offered document could not be declined nor it could be withheld

Application for return of document was allowed in circumstances.

2012 PCrLJ 1293 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

S. 497BailRelease of accused on bailEffect

Release of accused on bail did not amount to his acquittal but his judicial custody was transferred to a private person who was bound to produce the accused person before the court.