| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 2882 = 2010 SLD 2882 = 2010 MLD 313 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1942-B of 2009, decided on 11th November, 2009.
Sardar Tariq Masood, J
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1942-B of 2009, decided on 11th November, 2009.
Sardar Tariq Masood, J
FIDA HUSSAIN---Petitioner
VERSUS
THE STATE and others---Respondents
Law:
Section:
SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD, J.---Fida Hussain petitioner seeks bail before arrest in case F.I.R. No.408, dated 18-9-2009 registered under sections 447/511/379/506, P.P.C. at, Police Station Saddar District Rahimyar Khan. Briefly the prosecution story mentioned in the F.I.R. is that the petitioner along with others trespassed into the land of the complainant, threw his bricks outside and threatened to occupy the land of the complainant and stolen away the bricks. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that offence under section 379, P.P.C. has been deleted by the police and section 506, P.P.C. is not made out and remaining sections are bailable. Further contends that all the accused are allowed bail after arrest by the learned Magistrate vide order, dated 17-10-2009 and the case of the petitioner is at par with that of his co-accused and no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars. Learned Additional P.G. for the. State opposed the grant of bail by arguing that although section 379, P.P.C. has been deleted but section 506, P.P.C. is made out. Heard. Record perused. Co-accused of the petitioner has been allowed bail after arrest and during their physical remand, nothing was recovered and no useful purpose was likely to be served if the bail of the petitioner is not confirmed because after arrest, he could again be allowed bail on the ground that similarly placed other accused were already on bail. In the cases of Muhammad Ramzan v. Zafar Ullah and another (1986 SCMR 1380) and Shafqat Hussain v. The State (2007 YLR 1159), it was observed by the Courts that when bail application of the co-accused having one and the same role was allowed then it can also be given the benefit of such bail on the ground of consistency even at the stage of bail before arrest. So far section 506, P.P.C. is concerned, threat simpliciter did not constitute criminal intimation within the definition of section 503, P.P.C., unless it was to cause that person to do any act which he was not legally bound to do or to omit to do any act which that person was legally bound to do. In the present case, no such situation is…