Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2023 SHC 558
Court / Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court
Year of Decision: 2023
Decision Date: 2023-07-13
Parties: Ali Muhammad S/o Moin Uddin vs The State
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court on 2023-07-13, officially reported as 2023 SHC 558. In this matter between Ali Muhammad S/o Moin Uddin and The State, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
Case cited as 2023SHC558
Court Name: Sindh High Court Judge(s): Zulfiqar Ahmad Khan Title: Ali Muhammad S/o Moin Uddin vs The State Case No.: Cr. B.A. No. 1350 of 2023 Date of Judgment:2023-07-13 Reported As: 2023 SHC 558 Result: Bail Application Allowed
Judgment ORDER 1 Applicant Ali Muhammad son of Moinuddin is seeking bail after arrest in FIR No. 130/2023 lodged under Section 420, 467, 471, 34 PPC P.S. Awami Colony, Karachi. 2. The allegation against the applicant/accused is that he prepared the forged cheque and used the same as genuine as well as committed forgery. 3. It is inter alia contended by the learned counsel for the applicant/accused that offences with which applicant/accused is charged are bailable except Section 467 PPC which is yet to be proved at commencement of trial. He further contended that the two charges are bailable whereas one will be proved by the prosecution at the time of trial, therefore, in the meanwhile the applicant/accused is entitled for bail and mere incarceration of applicant/accused behind the bar would not serve any purpose. 4. On the other hand, learned APG contended that applicant/ accused has committed an offence which is against the society, therefore, he is not entitled for concession of bail. She further contended that the bail plea of the applicant/accused had been declined twice by the learned trial Court and the applicant/accused moved this bail plea without any fresh ground, therefore, the applicant/accused is not entitled for bail. 5. I have heard the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned APG and scanned the available material. It is an admitted fact that offences punishable under Section 420 and 471 PPC are bailable, whereas, Section 467 PPC will be proved by the prosecution after commencement of trial. Furthermore, the evidence is documentary in nature and the same will be adjudged at the time of evidence. It is clear that allegation can only be determined at the conclusion of the trial, where deeper appreciation of evidence will be made out whether the
---
## Page 2
accused is involved in the case or not. The allegations by themselves would not constitute bar for the grant of bail in peculiar circumstances of the case. Object of trial is to make an accused to face the trial and not to punish an under trial prisoner. Furthermore, basic idea is to enable the accused to answer criminal prosecution against him rather than to rot him behind the bars. The prosecution has to explore every avenue to prove the guilt of applicant/accused including the element of mens rea. The basic concept of bail is that liberty of an innocent person is not to be curtailed unless and until proved otherwise. Deep appraisal and detailed discussion of evidence is not permissible and court should not cross the barrier of permissible limits of law while making tentative assessment of the evidence at the bail stage. The exercise of this power should, however, be confined to the cases in which a good prima facie ground is made out for the grant of bail in respect of the offence alleged. 6. As a result therefore, this bail application is allowed. Applicant Ali Muhammad is granted bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Nazir of learned trial Court. 7. Before parting, I would like to further observe that if the applicant after getting bail fails to appear before the trial Court and the trial Court is satisfied that the applicant has misused the concession of bail and became absconder then the trial Court is fully authorised to take every action against the applicant and his surety including cancellation of the bail without making a reference to this Court.