PLJ 2026 Cr.C. (Note) 34
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Anwaarul Haq Pannun, J.
MUHAMMAD AWAIS etc.--Petitioner
versus
STATE, etc.--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 822-B of 2025, decided on 27.2.2025.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
ایس ۔ 498-پاکستان پینل کوڈ ، 1860 (1860 کا ایکس ایل وی) ایس ۔ 506 (ii) 337-A (i) 337-F (i) (ii) 337-L (2) 342 ، 148 اور
149-گرفتاری سے پہلے ضمانت ، منظوری-تصدیق شدہ - - الجیشن آف - - زبردستی اغوا کیا گیا اور دکان کے تہہ خانے میں خفیہ طور پر تصدیق کی گئی - درخواست گزاروں کو کوئی خاص کردار یا چوٹ سے منسوب نہیں کیا گیا ہے بلکہ ایف آئی آر میں ملزم افراد کو مشترکہ اور اجتماعی کردار سے منسوب کیا گیا ہے: ایسے حالات ، پہلی نظر میں درخواست گزاروں کے خلاف کیس کو مزید تحقیقات میں سے ایک بناتے ہیں ۔ دفعہ 506 (2) پی پی سی کا اطلاق اس صورت میں نہیں ہوگا جہاں مجرمانہ اطلاع کے نتیجے میں ایک اوور ایکٹ کو عملی جامہ پہنایا گیا ہو اور اسے ایک واضح ایکٹ میں ختم کیا گیا ہو ۔ - اوورٹ ایکٹ کو عملی جامہ پہنانے کے بعد درخواست گزاروں نے مبینہ طور پر شکایت کنندہ کے جسم پر متعدد چوٹیں بھی پہنچائی ہیں - سیکشن 337 ایف (2) پی پی سی کے علاوہ ، تمام جرائم باقی ہیں ۔ 337 اے (1) 337 ایف (1) 337 ایل (2) 342 ، پی پی سی جرائم کے ٹیبلر بیان کے مطابق قابل ضمانت ہے اور سیکشن 337 ایف (2) پی پی سی کے تحت جرم ممنوعہ شق کے دائرے میں نہیں آتا ہے-وہ پہلے ہی تحقیقات میں شامل ہو چکے ہیں-حالات میں اسے سلاخوں کے پیچھے بھیجنا استغاثہ کے لیے منافع بخش نہیں ہوگا-کسی شخص کی آزادی آئین کے ذریعہ ضمانت شدہ ایک قیمتی/شاندار حق ہے-درخواست کی اجازت ہے ۔
----S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860), Ss. 506(ii), 337-A(i), 337-F(i)(ii), 337-L(2), 342, 148 & 149--Pre-arrest bail, grant of--Confirmed--Allegation of--Forcibly abducted and secretly confirmed in basement of shop--No specific role or injury is attributed to petitioners rather a joint and collective role is ascribed to accused persons in FIR: Such circumstances, prima facie make case against petitioners to be one of further inquiry--Section 506(ii), PPC would not be applicable where an over act is materialized and ended into an overt act, in consequence of criminal intimation--After materializing overt act petitioners have also allegedly caused multiple injuries on body of complainant--Further Except Section 337F(ii), PPC, remaining all offences 337A(i), 337F(i), 337L(2), 342, PPC as per tabular statement of offences are bailable and offence under Section 337F(ii), PPC, does not fall within ambit of prohibitory clause--They have already joined investigation--In circumstances sending him behind bars would not be lucrative to prosecution--Liberty of a person is a precious/exquisite right guaranteed by Constitution--Petition is allowed. [Para 4] A & B
2022 SCMR 1946.
Mr. Nadeem Ahmad Tarar, Advocate for Petitioners.
Mr. Tanveer Haider Buzdar, DDPP for State.
Mr. Masood Arif Butt, Advocate for Complainant.
Date of hearing: 27.2.2025.
Order
By means of instant petition, the petitioners namely Muhammad Owais and Muhammad Shakeel have prayed for the grant of pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No. 3835, dated 28.12.2024, offence under Sections 506(ii), 337-A(i), 337-F(i)(ii), 337I(2), 342, 148, 149, PPC with Police Station Mumtazabad, Multan.
2. Precisely, the allegation against the petitioners as per crime report is that on 12.12.2024 at 5.00 PM, they along with their unknown co-accused, in prosecution of their common object, forcibly abducted the complainant and then secretly confined him in a basement of shop of petitioner Awais where they subjected the complainant to physical torture and on strength of arm obtained his signature on Pronote as well as some plain papers. They also snatched the cell phone as well as wallet containing cash Rs. 30,000/-and also snatched his Honda CD 70 mother cycle.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. An-explained delay of 16 days in lodging the crime report; Anjuman-e-Arthian, Multan has gave in writing that there is a dispute of misappropriation of more than one crore rupees allegedly made by complainant of this case of the petitioners’ party; furthermore, Saif-ud-Din, ASI P.S. Mumtazabad who reached at commission of shop of Petitioner No. 1 on his 15 call on 13.12.2024 has reported that at the spot nobody was injured and both the parties went to their houses in his presence. Further, the petitioners’ party also moved an application against the I.O. of this case complaining certain excesses allegedly made by him and mala fide of I.O. also prima facie smacks. Moreover, no specific role or injury is attributed to the petitioners rather a joint and collective role is ascribed to accused persons in FIR: Such circumstances, prima facie make the case against the petitioners to be one of further inquiry. More so, it has prima facie been observed that Section 506(ii), PPC would not be applicable where an over act is materialized and ended into an overt act, in consequence of criminal intimation, reliance is placed upon case titled Rana Muhammad Imran Nasrullah vs. The State etc (2022 SCMR 1946) and in the instant case after materializing overt act the petitioners have also allegedly caused multiple injuries on the body of complainant. Further Except Section 337F(ii), PPC, remaining all the offences 337A(i), 337F(i), 337L(2), 342, PPC as per tabular statement of offences are bailable and offence under Section 337F(ii), PPC, does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause. They have already joined the investigation. In the circumstances, sending him behind the bars would not be lucrative to the prosecution. Liberty of a person is a precious/exquisite right guaranteed by the Constitution. Thus, instant petition is allowed, subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds by the petitioner in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted is hereby confirmed. The above observations are tentative in nature and would not be taken as conclusive.
(A.A.K.) Petition allowed
0 Comments