IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE MUSHIR ALAM 
MR. JUSTICE DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN  
 
 
Criminal Petition No.1188/2016 
(On appeal from the judgment dated 2.11.2016 passed 
by 
the 
Lahore 
Hgih 
Court, 
Bahawalpur 
Bench, 
Bahawalpur in Crl.Misc. No.1850/B/2016) 
 
 
 
Muhammad Noman 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
… Petitioner 
VERSUS 
The State and another   
 
 
 
… Respondent(s) 
 
 
 
For the petitioner: 
 
Mr. Azam Nazeer Tarar, ASC 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
 
For the respondent/State: 
Ch. Muhammad Sarwar Sindhu, 
Addl.PG,Pb 
Maqbool Ahmad, Inspector, CID 
Muhammad Ali, SI/SHO 
 
Date of hearing:  
 
12.1.2017 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
 Dost Muhammad Khan,J-.  Brief facts of the case are 
that, according to Crime No.44/16, registered by Police Station CTD, 
Multan on 9.5.2016 at 4:30 pm, Noor Hassan ASI/CTD Bahawalpur 
alleged in his written complaint, sent to the Police Station that he was 
conducting raid near Toll Plaza, Bahawalpur when a secret informer 
told that five persons carrying handbags, were proceeding towards the 
Railway Bridge on river Sutlaj and appeared to be suspected militants, 
Crl.P.1188/16 
2 
thus, he bolted towards the spot with the police party and near 
Railway Bridge, river Sutlaj they spotted the gang, who attempted to 
flee away however, their attempt was foiled. On their arrest, they 
disclosed their names as (i) Abdul Hameed (ii) Sikandar Ilyas (iii) 
Usman Arif (iv) Muhammadullah while the fifth was the petitioner. 
From each one of the accused, one handbag each was recovered, 
containing explosive substances, time-bombs, arms & ammunition and 
some literature. Each bag was inscribed with the slogan, 
"ﺒﮐا ﷲﺮ". 
Full detail of the explosive substances, time-bombs, pistols, arms & 
ammunition of different kinds is mentioned in the report thus, they 
were 
charged 
for 
crimes 
u/S.9-ATA, 
S.7-ATA, 
S.4 
Explosive 
Substances Act, S.13-2(A)/20, Arms Ordinance, 1965 and amended 
Ordinance, 2015.  
 
 We have heard the learned ASC for the petitioner, Ch. 
Muhammad Sarwar Sindhu, learned Additional Prosecutor General, 
Punjab and have also put queries to Maqbool Ahmed, Inspector CTD 
and Muhammad Ali, SI/SHO, who in quick succession conducted 
investigation.  
2. 
  
Learned 
counsel 
for 
the 
petitioner 
argued 
with 
a 
considerable vehemence that the petitioner was arrested on 6.4.2016, 
which fact is evident from the application of brother of the petitioner 
namely, Muhammad Salman Arif, who has alleged therein that on the 
night between 3/4 April,  twenty to twenty five persons, dressed in 
black uniform, entered their house Survey No.55-A, New Muslim Town, 
Lahore without any lawful authority and took away the petitioner along 
with cell phones and three licensed guns/rifles, ATM Card and cash 
Crl.P.1188/16 
3 
amount. It is further stated in the application that he immediately 
called Emergency Response Force at 1:05 hrs, which reached at the 
spot after 1 ½ hrs.  
3. 
  
This application of brother of the petitioner was duly 
entered by Rescue Police-15 in daily diary vide serial No.564 on the 
same date, with the exact time, certified copy of which is available at 
Pg.24. It was further urged that the petitioner is a businessman and a 
tax payer and record to this effect has been annexed with this petition 
and has never been reported to be a militant himself or in anyway 
belong to any militant group, nor has been found to be a facilitator. 
Learned ASC elaborating his point of view further referred to filing of 
“Habeas Corpus” petition before the Justice of Peace, though with 
some delay but explaining the same he urged that the petitioner’s 
brothers and mother were searching about the petitioner and have 
made several complaints/applications to different authorities including 
the SHO, PS Muslim Town, Lahore, RPO, Lahore and SSP as well, 
however, no inquiry/investigation was conducted about the incident of 
abduction of the petitioner from his house because of malafide 
intention of the police. We put questions to the SHO, Muslim Town that 
when such a report was made with Rescue Police-15 and he was also 
approached in this regard, why he did not investigate into the incident, 
as to whether the same had indeed taken place in that manner or it 
was a false information, given by the brother of the petitioner, 
however, he admitted that he did not perform his duties under the law 
and also could not offer any explanation for this negligent omission, as 
the written complaint submitted to him by the brother of the petitioner 
about the abduction of the petitioner from his house, was not inquired 
Crl.P.1188/16 
4 
into or investigated in any manner whatsoever, rather the same was 
deliberately suppressed.  
4. 
  
We also put questions to the Investigating Officer of this 
case, as to whether the petitioner was found connected with any 
militant group or had been found financer or provided any other facility 
to such gang, his answer was a big, “NO”. He was also put a question 
that, when the incident of abduction of the petitioner, from his house 
was brought to his notice by the petitioner himself and his brother 
through a written application, whether he took a little pain to inquire 
from the Rescue Police-15 about the said incident or from the SHO of 
Muslim Town, Lahore, his reply was also in the negative. He was 
further asked, as to why this aspect of the matter was not inquired 
into/investigated, he was unable to offer any explanation, much less 
plausible.  
5. 
  
True that the country is confronted with a formidable 
terrorist activities from one end to the other so much so, that twice 
the 
Armed 
Forces 
were 
called 
in 
aid 
of 
the 
civil 
administration/government to suppress this grave mischief of a 
considerable magnitude, in which Army Officers/soldiers as well as the 
personnel of other Law Enforcing Agencies have suffered causalities in 
thousands, while the public was the major victim besides the public 
and private properties were extensively damaged through explosive 
substances planted or through suicidal attacks, however, this should 
not, in any manner, distract the Court of Law from doing justice in a 
given case, when, the investigation/inquiry carried out is neither 
satisfactory nor it is free from malice and the citizens’ implication in 
Crl.P.1188/16 
5 
such nature of cases is not free from reasonable doubt, thus, they 
cannot be left at the mercy of the police’s traditional chicanery 
indulging in such like tactics, not authorized by the law.  
6. 
  
While dealing with the liberty of the citizen at bail stage or 
otherwise, the Courts are required to take extra degree of care and 
caution so that actual terrorists/militants, challenging the writ of the 
State, may not go scot free, nor innocent citizens are grilled and put 
behind the bars, painting him/them as terrorists or belonging to 
militant gangs/groups because, in the present situation prevailing 
throughout the country, chances could not be ruled out of false 
implication of innocent citizens for ulterior motive, in some rare cases. 
7. 
  
It is essential and obligatory duty of the superior police 
officers of the rank of SP, SSP and above that, when the accused make 
such allegations, supported by record of the Police itself, they have to 
take charge of the investigation and to dig out the truth because it is 
the duty of the Police as a whole, irrespective of rank and file to bring 
the correct and true facts/materials before the Court of Law so that 
the actual criminals are punished, sans innocent citizens.  
8. 
  
In the present case, the facts and circumstances would 
show, that the investigation was one-sided and the other aspects of 
vital importance were not touched much less investigated into without 
any explanation offered by the investigating officer present in court, 
therefore, the case of the petitioner squarely falls within sub section 
(2) of S-497 Cr.P.C being susceptible to further inquiry. Therefore, in 
our considered view, the petitioner is found entitled to grant of bail as 
a matter of right and not as a matter of grace.  
Crl.P.1188/16 
6 
 
 
Accordingly this petition is converted into appeal and the 
same is allowed. 
9. 
 
These are the detailed reasons for our short order of today 
which is reproduced below:- 
“For the reasons to be recorded later, petitioner is 
admitted to bail subject to furnishing solving bonds 
in the sum of Rs.200,000/- (two lac) with two PR 
bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 
trial court.” 
 
 
Judge  
 
 
Judge  
Islamabad, the  
12th January, 2017 
Nisar/- 
Approved For Reporting.