Previous Non Convict Bail Confirmed
📝 AI Summary — Plain-Language Overview
This case comes from the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, and concerns a petitioner named Ghulam Qadir who sought post-arrest bail in a criminal case registered under the Pakistan Penal Code for offences related to theft and dishonestly receiving stolen property (cattle allegedly taken forcibly from a complainant). He was initially accused of robbery, but that charge was later dropped during investigation and replaced with lesser theft-related offences.
The court noted several important factors in deciding the case. First, there was an unexplained nine-month delay in filing the police report (FIR), which cast doubt on the prosecution's version of events. Second, the allegation that the petitioner had abetted the crime was not backed by any independent evidence. Third, the offences he was ultimately charged with did not fall under the more serious category of crimes that automatically restrict bail. The investigation was complete, the formal charges (challan) had been submitted to the trial court, but the trial itself had not yet begun. The petitioner also had no prior criminal record.
Given these circumstances, the judge ruled that keeping the petitioner in jail indefinitely served no real purpose and granted him bail, requiring him to post bail bonds and a surety. The judgment highlights how delays in reporting crimes and weak evidence can influence bail decisions, and that bail can be granted even in non-bailable offences when the case requires further inquiry.
یہ مقدمہ لاہور ہائی کورٹ، ملتان بینچ سے تعلق رکھتا ہے اور اس کا تعلق غلام قادر نامی درخواست گزار سے ہے جس نے ضابطہ فوجداری پاکستان کے تحت درج ایک فوجداری مقدمے میں ضمانت بعد از گرفتاری کی درخواست دی تھی۔ یہ مقدمہ چوری اور مال مسروقہ کو بددیانتی سے وصول کرنے کے الزامات پر مبنی تھا، جس میں مدعی سے مبینہ طور پر زبردستی مویشی چھین لیے گئے تھے۔ ابتدا میں درخواست گزار پر ڈکیتی کا الزام عائد کیا گیا تھا، تاہم تفتیش کے دوران یہ الزام ختم کر کے اس کی جگہ چوری سے متعلق کم سنگین نوعیت کے الزامات شامل کر دیے گئے۔
عدالت نے فیصلہ کرتے ہوئے کئی اہم پہلوؤں کو مدنظر رکھا۔ پہلا یہ کہ ایف آئی آر درج کرانے میں نو ماہ کی غیر واضح تاخیر ہوئی، جس سے استغاثہ کے بیان کردہ واقعات پر شک پیدا ہوتا ہے۔ دوسرا یہ کہ درخواست گزار کے جرم میں معاونت کرنے کے الزام کی تائید میں کوئی آزاد اور غیر جانبدار
Generated from the full judgment text below — not a substitute for reading the actual opinion.
PLJ 2015 Cr.C . ( Lahore ) 669 [ Multan Bench Multan ] Present : James Joseph, J. GHULAM QADIR--Petitioner versus STATE and another--Respondents Crl . Misc. No. 6766-B of 2014, decided on 8.1.2015. Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 382, 379 & 411--Post arrest bail, admitted--Further inquiry--Delay in lodging FIR-- Challan submitted--Doubt in prosecution story--Allegation of abatement against petitioner was not supported by any other independent evidence--Petitioner was behind bar since his arrest--Investigation against petitioner was completed--Petitioner was stated to be non convict and there was no record against petitioner--No useful purpose would be served by keeping petitioner behind bar for an indefinite period--Post arrest bail admitted. [P. 670] A & B Prince Rehan Iftikhar Sheikh, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Muhammad Ali Shahab , DPG for State. Nemo for Complainant. Date of hearing: 8.1.2015. Judgment Ghulam Qadir s/o Mahmand petitioner seeks after arrest bail in case FIR No. 376 dated 18.9.2014 for offences under Sections 382, PPC (later on offence under Section 382, PPC deleted and offences under Sections 379/411, PPC were added) registered at P.S. Kassowal , District Multan.
2. Briefly the prosecution story as unfolded in the FIR is that the assailants forcibly took the cattle belonging to the complainant in the night between 26/27lh of December, 2013.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties.
4. There is a delay of about nine months in lodging of the FIR which has not been explained which has created doubt on the prosecution story. The allegation of abatement against the petitioner is not supported by any other independent evidence. The offence under Section 382, PPC stands deleted during the course of investigation whereas the offences under Sections 379/411, PPC has been added which do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C . The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest. Investigation against the petitioner is complete. Challan has been submitted before the learned trial Court where reportedly the trial has not commenced so far. He is stated to be non convict and there is no record against him. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period.
5. For the reasons recorded above, the matter to the extent of the petitioner becomes one of further inquiry. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. The observations made in this order are tentative in nature. (S.L.) Bail admitted