Supreme Court confirmed prearrest bail in section 440-448-427 PPC because family society business and malafide intention and false implications can not be rule out.

- July 14, 2024

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

PRESENT:

Mr. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail

Mrs. Justice Ayesha A. Malik

Mr. Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi

J-

Crl.P.L.A No. 1345-L/2O23

[Against the order dated 13.11.2023 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore

in Crl.Misc.No. 33619/B/2023]

Versus

. ..Respondent(s)

The State etc.

For the Petitioner(s)

For the State

For the Complainant

: 30.05.2024.

Date of Hearing

JUDGMENT

Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, J.- Through the present

petition, the petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order

dated 13.11.2023 (Impugned Order) passed by Lahore High Court,

Lahore, whereby the pre-arrest bail has been declined to him in

FIR No.309/2023 dated 15.01.2023 registered under Section 448,

440, 511, 427, 148, 149, PPC at the Police Station Nishtar Colony,

Lahore.

accused persons while armed with fire-arm weapons forcibly

CrLP.L.A NO.1345-L/2023

entered into the housing society of the complainant and made

indiscriminate firing with their respective weapons. Although

sustained injuries and some fire shots hit the gate as well as the

building of office.

The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that

the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case with mala fide

intention and ulterior motives; that father of the petitioner is major

relation between the parties, the partial authority to run the

society was given to father of the complainant but subsequently

they usurp the entire assets; the case of petitioner is one of the

further inquiry.

The learned law officer assisted by the learned counsel

for the complainant vehemently opposed the contentions raised by

learned counsel for the petitioner and contend that petitioner is

including inside articles as well as CCTV cameras thus he may not

(late) launched Formanites Housing

specifically nominated in the FIR; that petitioner alongwith other

accused persons made indiscriminate firing and removed cash

perused the material available on the record.

Perusal of record reveals that petitioner’s father

Manzoor Watto) vide

07.06.2004. Petitioner’s father while reposing trust in his brother

tCrl.P,L,A NO.1345-L/2023

Zahoor Ahmed (father of complainant) partially authorized him to

the housing society. Hence,

possibility of false implication and malafide intention cannot be

ruled out.

Apart from this, it is a case of cross-version. The

petitioner in his cross-version has alleged that complainant party

In cases of counter

housing society being the owners of same.

complainant in the FIR and the other given by the opposite party,

bail is granted as a rule on the ground of further inquiiy for the

decided after recording of pro and contra evidence during the trial

aggressed upon and refusal of bail in such cases is an exception.

Reliance is placed on the cases of Fazal Muhammad (1976 SCMR

391), Shafiaan (1972 SCMR 682) and Khalid Mahmood (2013

SCMR 1415).

Moreover, in the FIR it is alleged that one passerby

injured due to firing of the accused

inquiry.

and

facts

the

all

consideration

into

Taking

circumstances stated above, we are of the view that the case of the

petitioner squarely falls within the ambit of section 497(2), Cr.P.C.

entitling for further inquiry into his guilt.

namely Zeeshan Haider was

injury which also makes the case of petitioner as one of further

persons however police has conducted no investigation into his

parties have family conflicts over

and also to ascertain which party

Crl.P,L.A No,1345-L/2023

-4-

10.

For the above reasons, this petition is converted into an

appeal and allowed. The impugned order of the High Court dated

bail subject to his furnishing surety bonds in the sum of Rs.

100,000/- and PR in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial

Court.

11.

Before parting, it is reiterated that the observations

made hereinabove are tentative in nature. The trial court is at

liberty to independently adjudicate the case on its own merits,

without being influenced by the observations made hereinabove.

12.

Above are the reasons of our short order of even date.

Judge

Judg

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.