S. 380--Pre-arrest bail, grant of--Allegation of--Petitioner took away a cow belonging to complainant--Petitioner was not named in FIR-

 PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 114
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Shakil Ahmad, J.
IKRAM-ULLAH--Petitioner
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 4699-B of 2022, decided on 18.10.2022.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--

----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 380--Pre-arrest bail, grant of--Allegation of--Petitioner took away a cow belonging to complainant--Petitioner was not named in FIR--Supplementary statement--No source from where complainant got information about petitioner’s involvement has been disclosed in supplementary statement--Merely suspicion has been raised against petitioner in supplementary statement and no tangible material has been collected by Investigating Officer so far to connect the; petitioner with commission of theft--Held: It is by now established principle of law that mere suspicion how strong it may be, cannot replace legal evidence--In such backdrop, possibility of petitioner’s involvement in this case on basis of mala fide and ulterior motive on part of complainant cannot be ruled out altogether--Bail allowed.

                                                                                      [Para 4] A & B

Syed Asad Abbas Kazmi, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. Ishfaq Ahmad Malik, Deputy Prosecutor General for State.

Ms. Asghari Begum, Advocate for Complainant.

Date of hearing 18.10.2022.

Order

After dismissal of his pre-arrest bail petition by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Taunsa Sharif vide order dated 30.06.2022, petitioner Ikram Ullah has filed this petition seeking pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 197 of 2021 dated 07.09.2021 registered at Police Station Vahowa District D.G. Khan for the offence under Section 380, PPC.

2. Allegation, in a nutshell, against petitioner is that he took away a cow belonging to complainant.

3. Heard and perused the record.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and learned DPG, it has been noticed that occurrence as per contents of FIR took place on the intervening night of 24th & 25th of August, 2021 whereas matter was reported to police with delay of fourteen on 07.09.2021. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. He was implicated in this case through supplementary statement of the complainant after more than one month of the occurrence on 03.10.2021 and no source from where the complainant got information about petitioner’s involvement has been disclosed in the supplementary statement. Merely suspicion has been raised against petitioner in the supplementary statement and no tangible material has been collected by the Investigating Officer so far to connect the petitioner with commission of theft. It is by now established principle of law that mere suspicion how strong it may be, cannot replace the legal evidence. In such backdrop, possibility of petitioner’s involvement in this case on the basis of mala fide and ulterior motive on the part of complainant cannot be ruled out altogether.

5. For the reasons recorded above, petition in hand is allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner by this Court is confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

(A.A.K.)          Bail allowed