IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 90-K OF 2023 
(On appeal against the order dated 28.04.2023 passed 
by the High Court of Sindh, Circuit Court Hyderabad in 
Criminal Bail Application No. S-362/2023) 
 
Munawar Bibi 
… Petitioner 
Versus 
The State  
… Respondents 
 
For the Petitioner: 
Mr. Abdul Khursheed Khan, ASC a/w petitioner 
in person 
(Via video link from Karachi) 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Zafar Ahmed Khan, Addl. P.G. Sindh 
(Via video link from Karachi) 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
03.08.2023 
 
ORDER 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- Through the instant petition under 
Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the 
petitioner has assailed the order dated 28.04.2023 passed by the learned 
Single Judge of the learned High Court of Sindh, Circuit Court Hyderabad, 
with a prayer to grant pre-arrest bail in case registered vide Crime No. 
62/2023 under Section 379 PPC at Police Station Kazi Ahmed, in the interest 
of safe administration of criminal justice.  
2. 
 
Briefly stated the allegation against the petitioner is that she 
along with her co-accused committed theft of two tires along with rims of the 
tractor trolley of the complainant.   
3. 
 
At the very outset, it has been argued by learned counsel for the 
petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely roped in this case against the 
actual facts and circumstances. Contends that the allegations leveled against 
the petitioners are false, frivolous, baseless, concocted and the prosecution 
story is not worthy of credit. Contends that there is a delay of more than three 
months in lodging the FIR for which no plausible explanation has been put forth 
Criminal Petition No. 90-K/2023 
2
by the complainant. Contends that the co-accused of the petitioner namely 
Muhammad Ali, who was ascribed the similar role, has been granted bail by 
the court of competent jurisdiction, therefore, following the rule of 
consistency the petitioner also deserves the same treatment to be meted 
out.  
4. 
 
On the other hand, learned Law Officer opposed the petition by 
contending that the petitioner has specifically been nominated in the crime 
report with a specific role and she admitted that she is ready and willing to 
return all the stolen articles, therefore, she does not deserve any leniency 
from this Court.  
5. 
 
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length 
and have perused the available record with their able assistance.  
6. 
 
As per the contents of the crime report, the allegation against 
the petitioner is that she along with her co-accused committed theft of two 
tires along with rims of the tractor trolley of the complainant. Although, 
learned High Court noted in the impugned order that the petitioner produced 
certain documents in which she admitted before the nekmards (pious men) 
that she is ready to return all the theft articles. However, the learned counsel 
for the petitioner denied the same and stated that the petitioner is an 
illiterate lady and could not understand any document. FIR was lodged after 
an inordinate delay of more than three months for which the complainant 
did not utter a single word. We have been informed that the co-accused of 
the petitioner namely Muhammad Ali, who was ascribed the similar role, has 
been granted post-arrest bail by the court of competent jurisdiction. In these 
circumstances any order by this Court on any technical ground that the 
consideration for pre-arrest bail and post-arrest bail are entirely on different 
footing would be only limited upto the arrest of the petitioner because of the 
reason that soon after her arrest she would be entitled for the concession of 
post-arrest bail on the plea of consistency. Reliance is placed on the cases 
reported as Muhammad Ramzan Vs. Zafarullah (1986 SCMR 1380), Kazim Ali 
and others Vs. The State and others (2021 SCMR 2086), Muhammad Kashif 
Iqbal Vs. The State and another (2022 SCMR 821) and Javed Iqbal Vs. The 
Criminal Petition No. 90-K/2023 
3
State through Prosecutor General of Punjab and another (2022 SCMR 1424). 
The petitioner is a lady of advanced age. The maximum punishment provided 
under the statute for the offence under Section 379 PPC is three years and 
the same does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. It is 
settled law that grant of bail in offences not falling within the prohibitory 
clause is a rule and refusal is an exception. Reliance is placed on Tariq Bashir 
Vs. The State (PLD 1995 SC 34). This Court in a number of cases has held that 
liberty of a person is a precious right which cannot be taken away without 
exceptional foundations. No useful purpose would be served by sending the 
petitioner behind the bars. It is now established that while granting pre-
arrest bail, the merits of the case can be touched upon by the Court. Reliance 
is placed on Miran Bux Vs. The State (PLD 1989 SC 347), Sajid Hussain @ Joji 
Vs. The State (PLD 2021 SC 898), Javed Iqbal Vs. The State (PLD 2022 SCMR 
1424) & Muhammad Ijaz Vs. The State (2022 SCMR 1271). Taking into 
consideration all the facts and circumstances stated above, we are of the 
view that the case of the petitioner squarely falls within the ambit of Section 
497(2) Cr.P.C. entitling for further inquiry into her guilt.  
7. 
 
For what has been discussed above, we convert this petition 
into appeal, allow it, set aside the impugned order and confirm the ad 
interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner by this Court vide order 
dated 18.07.2023.  
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
3rd of August, 2023 
Not Approved For Reporting 
Khurram