Principles Governing Pre-Arrest Bail and Misuse of Process

Panel: Riaz Ahmad, J.

This case, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1142/B of 1984, heard on May 21, 1984, involves Arif Mutin Bhutta as the Petitioner against The State as the Respondent. The primary subject of the case is the requirements for the grant or refusal of pre-arrest bail under Sections 497 and 498 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court outlined that when deciding on bail, a balance must be struck among three requirements: first, the presumption of innocence for an accused not yet found guilty; second, ensuring the legal process to ascertain guilt is not defeated; and third, preventing dangerous individuals from being at large in society. Specifically for pre-arrest bail, it is essential to establish that the case was not registered with an ulterior motive but was designed to disgrace the accused. If these conditions are not met, a court cannot grant pre-arrest bail. The court also emphasized the need for stern judicial action to curb “highhandedness” to maintain societal order.

Applying these criteria to the present case, the court found that the petitioner and his co-accused, who were residents of the same locality, had “brutally outraged the modesty of a woman, one of their neighbourer.” The circumstances did not indicate any ulterior motive on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioner or his co-accused with the intent to disgrace them. Consequently, the court determined that this was not a suitable case for granting pre-arrest bail or confirming the interim bail already allowed to the petitioner. Therefore, the court recalled its earlier order dated May 7, 1984, and dismissed the petition. The text does not explicitly name an Advocate-General; the State is listed as the respondent.

Download PDF