Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ASHRAF VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Sardar Muhammad AslamMalik Muhammad Afzal Farooka,Sohail Tahir
2006 Y L R 2461
2006 Y L R 2461
[Lahore]
Before Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.4024-B of 2005, decided on 3rd June, 2005.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 498---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.406---Pre-arrest bail, refusal of--Investigation qua accused was incomplete as the recover' was yet to be effected from accused---Petitioner/accused had failed to point out any mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of complainant or the police---Principles governing grant of pre-arrest bail were that accused had to show that case had cropped up due to political wire pulling; the arrest was tainted with mala fide and ulterior motives such as humiliation and unjustified harassment at the hands of police with intention to cause irreparable injury to the reputation and liberty of a person---Such grounds were lacking in the petition which was dismissed.
Malik Muhammad Afzal Farooka for Petitioner.
Qamar-uz-Zaman Qureshi for the Complainant.
Sohail Tahir for the State along with Muhammad Younas, A.S.-I., with Record.
ORDER
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.---Muhammad Ashraf, petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.120 dated 20-4-2005 registered under section 406, P.P.C. with Police Station, Urban Area, Sargodha on the ground that he has falsely been implicated in the instant case; and that similar relief has been refused by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha vide his order dated 21-5-2005.
2. Conversely, learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposed the prayer for confirmation of bail and submitted that recovery of ornaments weighing 10 tolas, sale-deed of the house of the complainant and other articles are yet to be effected from the petitioner.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. The investigation qua him is incomplete as the recovery is yet to be effected from the petitioner. The petitioner has failed to point out any mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant or the police. The principles governing the grant of pre-arrest bail are that the petitioner accused has to show that the case was cropped up due to political wire pulling, the arrest being tainted with mala fide and ulterior motives such as humiliation and unjustified harassment at the hands of the police with intention to cause irreparable injury to the reputation and liberty of a person, which is lacking in this petition.
5. For what has been discussed above, this is meritless and is dismissed.
H.B.T./M-290/L????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail refused.