ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT
OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Cr. Bail Application No.S-250 of 2021
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
1.
For
orders on office objections
2.
For
hearing of bail application.
20.08.2021
Mr.
Amanullah G. Malik, Advocate for the Applicant
Syed
Sardar Ali Shah Riavi, DPG
----------------
At the
very outset, learned Counsel representing the Applicant submits that earlier
bail application of the applicants was declined, as the same was for pre-arrest
bail, subsequentlyhe preferred pre-arrest bail application before this court
which was declined and he was taken into custody. Thereafter he filed
post-arrest bail before the trial court and while declining the post-arrest
bail application vide order dated 12.04.2021, learned trial Court had observed
that this is second bail application after his earlier bail application was
declined upto High Court and further observed that contentions of learned
Counsel are already been discussed and no fresh ground is evaluated for making
the case of applicant for further inquiry and dismissed the bail application.
Learned
DPG also does not support the impugned order on the ground that findings for
deciding pre-arrest bail and post-arrest bail are distinguishable to each other
and the same are to be decided on its own merits.
The observation of the learned trial Court that after
rejection of pre-arrest bail on merits there exist no fresh grounds for grant
of post-arrest bail and dismissed it is not sustainable under the law. It is
observed that this Court in C.P. No.D-8324/2019& C.P. No.D-5482/2019
after the dismissal of pre-arrest bail observed that “this is their second attempt for
same relief, their earlier effort in this regard ended vide order dated
08.07.2019 when their petitions for pre-arrest bail were dismissed and they
were taken into custody by NAB”.
Such order was impugned before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in Civil Petitions No.995 of 2020 and
1013 of 2020 Amin Muhammad FAzwani v. The NAB through its Chairman and others;wherein
the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held that the learned High Court
mistakenly considered that the petitions for bail after arrest before it, were
filed in the second round of such relief and directed to this Court to decide
the bail petitions of the petitioners on its own merits.
In another unreported case of Syed Ali Raza& others v.
Federation of Pakistan through Secretary M/O law, Islamabad & others(Civil Petition No. 194,298 &304 of
2018) the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held that;-
8.
……….With respect to the learned Judges of the High Court, we may point
out that the principles governing pre-arrest and post arrest bail are different
and merely because the petitioners’ petitions for pre-arrest bail were
dismissed was not a sufficient reason to also deprive them with the concession
of post-arrest bail.
In the case Lt. Gen. (Rtd.) Fazl-e-Haq v. The State (1989 SCMR
1724) the Hon’ble Supreme Court of
Pakistan has held that;-
6. The learned counsel for the
petitioner has requested us that on observation be made in this order that the
test somewhat prematurely applied by the High Court in para.8 of the impugned
judgment may not be taken by the High Court or Courts subordinate to it to
prejudice the matter of pending application of the petitioner for bail after
arrest. The other is that an observation be made that in view of the nature of
the proceedings and the belated stage at which the petitioner has been
implicated there will be expeditious disposal of the pending matters.
7. Observation made in an order dealing
with a matter of bail before arrest do not ordinarily and should not generally
affect the exercise and undertaken or to be undertaken after arrest, for grant
or refusal of bail. We are sure that the
Courts will follow that principle and be not prejudiced in any matter
thereby. We are also confident that keeping in view the nature of the
proceedings an early and expeditious disposal of the matter will be ensured at
every level.
In the case of Muhammad Hussain v. The State (1982
SCMR 227)the Hon’ble Supreme
Court of Pakistan has held that;-
10. …….. We can, however, not lose sight
of the fact that pre-arrest bail and bail after arrest are based on entirely
different principles and the rejection of an application for the former does
not have any bearing on the latter.
In
sequel to above, impugned order dated 12.04.2021 is set-aside and the matter is
remanded back to the trial Court with direction to learned trial Court to
decide the bail application of the Applicant on its own merits preferably
within a period of one month.
Copy of this order be communicated
to Mr. Nadeem Ahmed Khan, Additional Sessions Judge, Moro, for compliance.
Faisal Mumtaz/ PS JUDGE