Bail After Arrest
Defined: Bail means to release a person from the custody of police and delivered him into the hands of surety, who undertakes to produce him in the court whenever to require to do so.
(2007 YLR 1582)
Cases in favour of prosecution
No doubt offence under section 489-F P.P.C. does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C., but it is not a rule of universal application to grant bail in each and every case. Grant of bail is discretionary and the discretion out to be exercise judicially. Accused remained absconder for long six years have caused not only financial loss but mental and physical agony to the complainant and his family. Long abscondence of accused is entitled him to the concession of bail.
(2010 P.Cr.L.J, 1099)
Grant of bail in cases not following within the domain of prohibitory clause or proviso to section 497 Cr.P.C., is not a role of universal application. Each case has to be seen through its own facts and circumstances grant of bail no doubt is a discretion to a court but its exercise cannot be arbitrary, fanciful or perverse.
(2009 SCMR 174)
For an offence punishable with death or transportation for life, an accused charged with the same is not to be released on bail if there are reasonable grounds for believing that he has committed such an offence. The onus is on the prosecution to disclose those reasonable grounds and the courts has to examine the data available in the case to find out whether such reasonable grounds exist, to connect the accused person with the crime alleged against him.
(PLD 1972 SC 81)
Fugitive from law and courts losses some of the normal rights granted by the procedural as also substantive law. Unexplained noticeable abscondence entitles an accused to the concession of bail.
(2008 YLR 2086)
Court may decline to admit an accused to bail if a recognized exceptional circumstance is available for such refusal.
(2005 YLR 1215, PLD 1997 SC 545 ref)
Principles laid down by Supreme Court in Bail after Arrest
The scope of bail u/s 497 Cr.P.C. has been thoroughly discussed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in PLD 1995 S.C 34, following the principle as laid down by the apex court this section divides non-bailable offence into two categories, i.e:-
(i) Offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for 10 years and
(ii) Offences punishable with imprisonment for less than 10 years.
Grant of bail in non-bailable offence following in second category punishable with imprisonment for less than 10 years is a rule and refusal and exception. Bail in cases falling in the second category will be declined only in extra ordinary and exception cases e.g:-
(i) Where there is likely hood of abscondence of accused
(ii) Where there is apprehension of accused tampering with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) Where there is danger of the offence being repeated if the accused is released on bail.
(iv) Where the accused is a previous convict.
(2008 YLR 2717)
Large quantity of charas i.e, 200 kg recovered from the Suzuki pickup which was in possession of the accused at the time of recovery. Witnesses sporting the version of prosecution punishment provided for the offence fell under the prohibitory clause of S.497 Cr.P.C., embargo contained in sub-section 1 of S.51 CNSA fully attracted, bail refused.
(2010 Pcr.L.J 272)
To conclude, bail of a person can be dismissed if there is no malafide / false implication by the complainant party. Furthermore, bail application can be dismissed in case of apprehension of abscondence, tempering with prosecution evidence, repetition and previously conviction.
It is not hard and fast rule that the case not fall in prohibitory clause. So bail can be dismissed in such like cases.
Each case has its own facts and circumstances and to be decided on its own merits.