PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 93
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----Ss. 498/498-A--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 337-F(v)/337-L(ii)/337-A(i)/34--Pre-arrest bail--grant of--Occurrence was reported to police with the delay of 16-days--Place of occurrence was the house of petitioners and the complainant is related to them as brother in law (behnoi) and an altercation on the issue of their sister arises--Malafide being a state of mind cannot always be proved through direct evidence--The petitioners have made out the case for further inquiry for grant of pre-arrest bail--Petition is allowed. [Para 3 & 5] A, B, C & D
PLD 2021 SC 708 ref.
Mss Hina Mahar Nadeem, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. Tanvir Haider ADPP for State.
Mr. Muhammad Yousaf Zubair Advocate for Complainant.
Date of hearing: 16.11.2022.
PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 93
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Muhammad Amjad Rafiq, J.
ZEESHAN and another--Petitioners
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 6618-B of 2022, decided on 16.11.2022.
Order
Petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 542 dated 12.06.2022 registered under Sections 337-F (v)/337-L (2)/337-A (i)/34, PPC at Police Station City, District Muzaffargarh.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as learned ADPP and perused the record.
3. Perusal of record shows that occurrence took place on 27.05.2022 which was reported to police on 12.06.2022 with the delay of 16 days for which no explanation has been rendered. The injury attributed to Asif Ali petitioner was declared by the doctor as falling within the mischief of Section 337-L (2) which is bailable.
4. The role assigned to Zeeshan was of causing Sota blow on the head and second below hit on the index finger of the complainant. Injury observed by the doctor on the head felling within the mischief of Section 337-A (ii), PPC whereas on the index finger it was counted as falling within the mischief of Section 337-F (v), PPC.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that there are clouds on the nature of injuries, therefore, matter was taken up before the District Standing Medical Board and despite repeated processes complainant did not appear before the said Board, which amounts to malafide intention of the injured complainant. It has further been observed that the place of occurrence was the house of petitioners and the complainant is related to them as brother in law (behnoi) and an altercation on the issue of their sister arises, which was translated into present occurrence, therefore, false implication of the petitioners in the given situation cannot be ruled out. The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case law reported as “Shahzada Qaiser Arfat alias Qaiser vs. The State and another” (PLD 2021 Supreme Court 708) has held that malafide being a state of mind cannot always be proved through direct evidence, and it was often to be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case. It has been further held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases reported as “Khair Muhammad and another vs. The State through P.G. Punjab and another” (2021 SCMR 130) and “Javed Iqbal versus. The State through Prosecutor General of Punjab and anothers” (2022 SCMR 1424) that while deciding pre-arrest bail application merits of the case can be touched upon. In the circumstances, apparently the petitioners have made out the case for further inquiry for grant of pre-arrest bail, hence, this petition is allowed and interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners is confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bond in the sum of Rs. l,00,000/- (one lac) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
(A.A.K.) Bail allowed
0 Comments