Cancellation of Pre-Arrest Bail Due to Improper Judicial Discretion

Panel: Riaz Ahmad, J.

This case, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2903/8 of 1986, decided on December 16, 1986, involved Muhammad Yaqub as the Petitioner against Muhammad Ramzan and another as Respondents. The central issue was the cancellation of pre-arrest bail granted by the trial court under Section 497(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code, read with Sections 452, 506, 427, 440, and 380, and Sections 148/149 of the Penal Code. The petition for pre-arrest bail was vehemently opposed before the trial court on the grounds that recovery was yet to be effected from the accused. The trial court, in granting bail, made observations about police using “other methods, experience and skill” for recoveries, which the High Court deemed “most perfunctory in nature” and indicative of a “slipshod manner” in which the trial court handled the issue. The High Court underscored that pre-arrest bail should not be used to defeat the object of recovery.

The High Court further noted that both itself and the Supreme Court had repeatedly laid down principles governing the grant of pre-arrest bail, which were overlooked by the lower court. It was emphasized that a person seeking pre-arrest bail must establish that the case is

mala fide and that they are being implicated with an intent to disgrace them. Upon reviewing the record, the High Court found that none of these justifying features existed. Consequently, the High Court concluded that the Additional Sessions Judge’s exercise of discretion was not based on sound judicial principles. The concession of pre-arrest bail granted to the respondent was withdrawn, and an order was issued for the respondent to be taken into custody forthwith. This petition was therefore allowed.

Download PDF