drupal analytics

December 4, 2016

Rule of Consistency in Criminal Law of Pakistan | Case Laws

Rule of Consistency

Meaning of rule of consistency is at same footing, at par. Conformity in the application of something, typically that which is necessary for the sake of logic, accuracy, or fairness.

Article 25 of the constitution 1973

All citizens are equal before law and are entitled to equal protection of law. Decision of Supreme Court binding on other courts.

Article 189 of constitution of Pakistan 1973

Any decision of the Supreme Court shall, to the extent that it decides a question of law or is based upon or enunciates a principle of law, be binding on all other courts in Pakistan.

Decision of high court binding on subordinate courts high court shall, to the extent that it decides a question of law or is based upon or enunciates a principle of law, be binding on all courts subordinate to it.

Article 201 of constitution of Pakistan 1973

Subject to article 189 of the constitution  of Pakistan 1973, any decision of the

When apply.

It applies when the accused having same and identical role with the co accused then he is entitle for the same relief which was granted to co-accused by the court

In this case law the HIGH court t granted relief to civil servant in order to maintain balance and uphold doctrine of equality PLJ 2012 LAH 24

Rule of consistency in criminal cases

  • 382/506/148/149, bail allowed on the ground of rule of consistency PLJ 2014 CRC 347
  • 302/324 motive not assigned to petitioner, contradiction between fir and supplementary version of complainant. cross version, no injury assigned to deceased ,investigation completed, co accused on bail, bail allowed to present accused PLJ 2014 CRC266

Rule of consistency in pre arrest bail

  • 324, pre arrest bail, accused remained absconder, his absconding would not debar the accused from the relief when otherwise present accused is at par with co accused to him bail granted by court. pre arrest allowed to the present petitioner. PLJ2014 CRC 124

Rule of consistency in post arrest bail

  • 395/412, post arrest bail. Role of accused is at par with co accused to which bail already granted. Bail allowed to the present accused on rule of consistency. PLJ 2013 CRC 780

Rule of consistency under anti-corruption law

  • 420/468/471/5(2) 1947 PCA bail cannot be refused as punishment. 5(2) PCA 1947 punishment is up to 7 years which does not fall in prohibitory clause. co accused on bail, bail allowed to present accused PLJ 2013 CRC 16

When rule of consistency would not apply

  • 302/323/404      accused remained proclaimed offender, and hardened and disparate criminal, attacked on police party and murdered constable, prompt fir, specific role, co accused on bail, court held that accused remained proclaimed offender rule of consistency would not apply bail refused PLJ 2011 CRC 905
  • —S. 497–Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 185(3)–Bail refusal of–Plea of alibi–No such defence at that time–Accused was nominated in FIR–Specific role of raising lalkara was assigned–Accused was declared innocent by the police on the plea of alibi–By applying rule of consistency granted bail to the petitioner–Challenge to–Cancellation of bail was allowed–Assailed–When the accused moved bail before arrest he did not raise plea of alibi, meaning thereby that he had no such defence at that time–To ascertain and evaluate the plea of alibi, the accused had relied upon the evidence of a large number of witnesses–Such exercise cannot be undertaken at that stage, as it requires deeper appreciation of evidence which can only be done at the time of trial, when such witnesses were produced by the accused in the Court and are subjected to cross-examination by prosecution–Leave was refused PLJ 2011 SC 40
  • —-S. 497–Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 322, 337-G, 279 & 109–Bail, refusal of–Rash and negligent driving–Cause of death of five person besides causing injuries to few others–Rule of consistency–Nature of allegation against accused is to effect that he was driving a vehicle so rashly and negligently that it had caused death of five persons, which was, prima facie, proved on basis of evidence so far collected during investigation, his case was definitely not at par with case of co-accused–If bail is allowed to an accused of such offence, it would amount to issuance of licence to such accused persons, who might cause death of so many persons through the act of rash and negligent driving which is against the spirit of law–Bail was dismissed.  PLJ 2011 SC 662
  •  498 Cr.P.C.-Bail-Anticipatory-Prayer for-Offence u/Ss. 409/109/34 PPC read with Section 5(2) Act II of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947-There is no case for any humiliation or unnecessary harassment or false involvement has been made out-Prosecution is not motivated with any malice or ulterior motives-Two co-accused were granted bail after arrest while applicant has applied for anticipatory bail-Pre-arrest bail and bail after arrest are based on entirely different principles-Rule of consistency is misconceived-Suppression of tiling earlier bail application and his abscond ence are additional factors which disentitle applicant to grant of discretionary relief-Held: No case for anticipatory bail-Application dismissed.PLJ 1997 Cr.C 1299
  • -S. 497 Cr.P.C.–. 381/411 PPC– Contention that petitioner is entitled to sail with co-accused in the same boat through attraction of rule of consistency as he (co-accused) was admitted to bail by Additional Sessions Judge, that offence u/S. 381- A/411 PPC do not fall within prohibitory clause; that recovery of car stands effected and that in spite of submission of challan trial has not been started Rule of consistency has to be followed by subordinate Court and if it has not been followed, High Court is not bound by order passed in favour of co-accused-Allegation against accused is that he alongwith his co-accused removed/lifted car from road-side which fact fortunately came to notice of owner of car who alongwith his companion and police followed petitioner/accused and he was over-powered it means petitioner was arrested at the spot alongwith stolen car-Held : It is an exceptional case wherein rule that an accused involved in a case not falling within prohibitory clause should not be admitted to bail-Held furthe Petitioner was earlier convicted and chance of repetition cannot be ruled out-Bail refused. PLJ 1997 Cr.C. (Lahore) 1197

Not Absolute Rule

  • It is held by honorable court that rule of consistency is not absolute rule. 1993 PCRLJ 2135
  • It is held by supreme court of Pakistan that grant of bail to one co accused does not justify grant of bail to a person who is otherwise not entitle for bail. PLD 1988 SC 84
  • Superior courts have right to form independent opinion in respect of accused involved in the case, notwithstanding the fact that one of the co accused has been released on bail. Granting bail on rule of consistency does not apply stricto senso when there are more than one accused. 2010 SCMR 1735

Rule of consistency in narcotics case

  • 9c police opinion is not binding upon court, co accused on bail, rule of consistency would apply in appropriate cased. bail allowed to accused PLJ 2011 CRC 802

Conclusion

Similar set of persons bearing not same and identical role in the FIR cannot claim the bail as a matter of right on the rule of consistency because their roles are distinguishable.

Speak Your Mind

*