AFTAB AHMED GORAR, J.---Applicant booked in case Crime No. 187/ 2021 registered with Police Station Baloch Colony Karachi under sections 420/406/ 34, P.P.C. has approached this Court by tiling the captioned application for pre-arrest bail as his earlier bail application of similar nature had been dismissed by the trial court vide impugned order dated 28.05.2021.
2. Record reflects that applicant was admitted to interim pre-arrest bail vide order dated 31.05.2021 and today it is fixed for confirmation or otherwise.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant with mala fide intention and ulterior motives. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that applicant is regularly appearing before the trial court. Lastly he prayed that interim pre-arrest bail order dated 31.05.2021 may be confirmed.
4. Conversely, learned Assistant Prosecutor General Sindh opposed the confirmation of bail and submitted that applicant is guilty of offence, there is sufficient material available on record and his name is appearing in the FIR. The complainant who is present in court also objected the confirmation of bail. He stated that applicant is harassing and pressurizing the complainant after grant of pre-arrest bail by this Court. The Investigating Officer of the case present in court submits that the applicant has not joined the investigation and number of such like case are registered against him.
5. Perusal of impugned order reveals that learned trial court, after examining the material available with it, has rightly dismissed the bail application by observing that there is sufficient material available on record connecting the applicant with the alleged crime.
6. Admittedly, applicant did not join the investigation and misused the concession of pre-arrest bail as allegations of issuing threats are made by the complainant. Record further shows that applicant is habitual offender of committing such type of offences and is involved in number of cases. The name of applicant is appearing in the FIR and applicant has not uttered a single word as to why he has been falsely involved in this case. Prima facie, there appears reasonable grounds for believing that applicant has committed alleged offence. Ingredients for grant of pre-arrest bail to applicant/accused are missing in the case.
7. Grant of bail to an accused required in a cognizable and non-bail offence prior to his arrest is an extraordinary judicial intervention in an ongoing or imminent investigative process. It clogs the very mechanics of State authority to investigate and prosecute violations of law designated as crimes.
To prevent arrest of an accused where it is so required by law is a measure with far reaching consequences that may include loss or disappearance of evidence. The Statute does not contemplate such a remedy and it was judicially advented way back in the year 1949 in the case of Hidayat Ullah Khan v. The Crown (PLD 1949 Lahore 21) with purposes sacrosanct and noble, essentially to provide judicial refuge to the innocent and the vulnerable from the rigors of abuse of process of law; to protect human dignity and honour from the humiliation of arrest intended for designs sinister and oblique. The remedy oriented in equity cannot be invoked in every run of the mill criminal case, prima facie supported by material and evidence, constituting a non-bailable / cognizable offence, warranting arrest, an inherent attribute of the dynamics of Criminal Justice System with a deterrent impact: it is certainly not a substitute for post arrest bail as held in the recent judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in PLD 2020 SC 293 (Ghulam Farooq Channa v.
Special Judge ACE (Central-l) Karachi and another.
8. It is settled that for deciding the bail application the court has to observe the tentative assessm ent and deeper appreciation of evidence is not required and it will not be fair to go into discussion about the merits of the case at this juncture. In this respect reliance is being placed on the cases of Saleh Muhammad v. The State (PLD 1986 Supreme Court 211) and The Slate v. The Zubair and 4 others (PLD 1986 Supreme Court 163). Thus taking a tentative assessm ent of the available record. I am of the considered view that there is sufficient material available on record connecting the applicant with the alleged crime and being prima facie linked with the commission of the offence is held disentitled to the concession of bail. Resultantly, the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the, applicant vide order dated 31.05.2021 is recalled. The applicant is present in court he is taken into custody and remanded to Central Jail, Karachi.
9. Before parting with this order, it is directed that any observations recorded in this order, being purely tentative in nature, should in no way prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial Court where the case be decided on its own merits.