2026 S C M R 792

 2026 S C M R 792

[Supreme Court of Pakistan]

Present: Athar Minallah, Irfan Saadat Khan and Malik Shahzad

Ahmad Khan, JJ

HAKEEM alias Peer ---Petitioner

Versus

The STATE and another ---Respondents

Criminal Petition No. 1322 of 2025, decided on 9th September, 2025.

(Against the order dated 11.07.2025 of the Peshawar High Court,

Bannu Bench passed in Crl. Misc. B.A. No. 267-B of 2025).

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----S.497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 420, 406, 489-F & 34---

Constitution of Pakistan, Art.185(3)---Cheating and dishonestly

inducing the delivery of property, criminal breach of trust,

dishonest issuance of a cheque, common intention---Bail, grant of---

Further inquiry---It was not disputed that the alleged offences fell in

the category of non-prohibitory clause under Section 497, Cr.P.C.---

Co-accused was alleged to have entered into agreements with

various persons---Whether or not the offences to the extent of the

petitioner were attracted required further probe---Complainant and

the State had not been able to show any exceptional circumstances

so as to decline the concession of post-arrest bail---While

considering the grant of bail, where offences fell within the non-

prohibitory clause, the grant of bail had to be considered favourably

as a rule, and might be declined in exceptional cases---Extra-

ordinary and exceptional cases, inter alia, included likelihood of

abscondence of the accused; apprehension of the accused tempering

with the prosecution evidence; and the danger of the offence being

repeated---Thus, a case of further inquiry was made out in the

present case---Investigation had been concluded to the extent of the

petitioner and his further incarceration would not serve any useful

purpose---Petition was converted into an appeal and the same was

allowed and the petitioner was granted post-arrest bail, in

circumstances.

(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----S.497---Bail order---Observations of the Court---Scope---

Observations made in the bail order are based on tentative assessment of the available record and shall not, in any manner,

prejudice the trial proceedings.

Arshad Hussain Yousafzai, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.

M. Bashar Naveed, Additional Advocate General, Khyber

Pakhtunkhwa along with Farmanullah, S.I. and Umar Badshah, ASI for

the State.

M. Tariq Shah, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant (via

video link from Peshawar).

Date of hearing: 9th September, 2025.

ORDER

ATHAR MINALLAH, J.---The petitioner has sought leave against the

order of the High Court dated 11.07.2025, whereby his petition seeking

post-arrest bail was dismissed. The petitioner was nominated in crime

report No. 317 of 2025, dated 17.05.2025, registered at P.S. Karak,

District Karak for commission of the alleged offences under sections

420, 406, 489-F and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 ('P.P.C.'). The

petitioner has sought post-arrest bail and his petition was dismissed by

the trial court vide order dated 14.06.2025. His bail petition was also

dismissed by the appellate fora i.e. the learned Additional Sessions

Judge, Karak vide order dated 20.06.2025. The learned High Court had

also subsequently declined his post-arrest bail vide the impugned

order dated 11.07.2025.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel

for the complainant as well as the learned Additional Advocate

General on behalf of the State. The record has been perused with their

able assistance.

3. It is not disputed that the alleged offences fall in the category of

non-prohibitory clause under section 497 of the Cr.P.C. The co-accused

was alleged to have entered into agreements with various persons.

Whether or not the offences to the extent of the petitioner are

attracted requires further probe. As it is already noted, the offences

fall under the non-prohibitory clause and the learned counsel for the

complainant and the State counsel have not been able to show any

exceptional circumstances so as to decline the concession of post-

arrest bail. This Court has consistently held that while considering the

grant of bail, where offences fall within the non-prohibitory clause,

the granting of bail has to be considered favourably as a rule, but may

be declined in exceptional cases. The extra ordinary and exceptional

cases, inter alia, includes likelihood of abscondence of the accused;

apprehension of the accused tempering with the prosecution evidence;

and the danger of the offence being repeated

1. We are therefore, of the

opinion that a case of further inquiry is made out. The investigation has been concluded to the extent of the petitioner and his further

incarceration would not serve any useful purpose.

4. In view of the above, this petition is converted into an appeal and

the same is allowed. The concession of post-arrest bail is extended in

favour of the petitioner subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of

Rs. 2,00,000/- (two hundred thousand) with one surety in the like

amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. Needless to

mention that the observations made in this order are based on

tentative assessment of the available record and they shall not, in any

manner, prejudice the trial proceedings.

JK/H-7/SC Appeal allowed.