IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 273-L OF 2021 
(On appeal against the order dated 11.02.2021 
passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Crl. 
Misc. No. 65023-B/2020) 
 
Major Rehan Zia 
 
 
… Petitioner 
Versus 
The State and another 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner: 
Mr. Muhammad Anes Ghazi, ASC a/w 
petitioner in person 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Khurram Khan, Addl.P.G. Punjab 
Mr. Nasir, S.I 
 
 
For the Respondent (2): 
Ms. Lubna Afzal, in person 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
03.01.2022 
 
ORDER 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- The petitioner through 
this petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic 
Republic of Pakistan, 1973, has assailed the order dated 
11.02.2021 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High 
Court, Lahore, with a prayer to grant pre-arrest bail in case 
registered vide FIR No. 120/2020 dated 13.03.2020 under Sections 
448/380 PPC with Police Station Model Town, Lahore, in the interest 
of safe administration of criminal justice. 
2. 
 
Precisely the allegation against the petitioner is that in 
between the night 17/18-08-2019, he had broken up the locks of the 
room of the complainant; had stolen the luggage belonging to the 
complainant and thereafter while misusing his official authority 
occupied the room and extended threats to dire consequences.  
3. 
 
The learned counsel for the petitioner at the very outset 
has argued that the petitioner has been falsely roped in this case 
Criminal Petition No. 273-L/2021 
-: 2 :- 
against the actual facts and circumstances due to mala fides of the 
complainant in connivance with local police. Further contends that 
the occurrence has taken place in the dark hours on 17/18-08-2019, 
however, the matter was reported with the delay of seven months 
for which no plausible explanation has been rendered. Contends 
that even prior to lodging of the instant application, an application 
was filed on 30.09.2019, which was found false during the course 
of interrogation by two senior gazetted officers of the Police. 
Contends that the allegations against the petitioner are bald, which 
are not substantiated by any material and even the list of articles 
allegedly stolen was placed on the record after the registration of the 
crime report, which is sufficient to discard the whole prosecution 
case. Contends that the petitioner being an Army officer was posted 
in operational area of Wanna at the time of alleged occurrence and 
as such the whole prosecution case is smashed to ground on this 
score alone. Contends that the very registration of this case is 
nothing but an abuse of process of law. Lastly contends that the 
petitioner being an Army officer, there is no chance of his 
absconsion.   
4. 
 
On the other hand, learned Law Officer contends that 
the complainant had no malice to falsely involve the petitioner in the 
present case but admitted that he had expired during the pendency 
of the case. Further contends that the petitioner is specifically 
arrayed as an accused, therefore, he does not deserve any leniency 
by this Court.  
5. 
 
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some 
length and have perused the available record.  
 
 
There is no denial to this fact that the instant 
prosecution was lodged with inordinate delay of about seven 
months in which the petitioner has sought extraordinary relief from 
this Court. The perusal of the record clearly reflects that it was at-
least the second attempt made by the complainant to proceed 
against the petitioner. In earlier round of litigation, the accusation 
against the petitioner was found baseless and in this regard a 
detailed inquiry was carried out by SP Model Town, Lahore. After 
Criminal Petition No. 273-L/2021 
-: 3 :- 
the completion of the inquiry, the Inquiry Officer, a senior police 
officer was also saddled with the allegation of not conducting the 
investigation as per law. The same was probed into by SSP 
(Accountability) and the fate of the allegation against SP Model Town 
was found to be baseless and without any legal justification. 
Perusal of the instant petition reveals that there are only bald 
allegations against the petitioner as time, date and detail of the 
allegedly stolen articles is not given. Even it is an admitted fact that 
the petitioner is the sole proprietor of the house and this has been 
declared by a court of competent jurisdiction after prolonged 
litigation. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that after the 
moving 
of 
application 
before 
the 
Investigating 
Officer, 
the 
complainant passed away. During the course of proceedings, one 
lady claiming herself to be sister-in-law of the deceased complainant 
tried to take charge as complainant. She was in-fact claiming her 
status on the basis of a power-of-attorney, which does not exist in 
the eyes of law as the executant of the same has already passed 
away. As far as criminal law is concerned, the concept of initiation 
of prosecution lies with the aggrieved person under Section 154 
Cr.P.C. and thereafter the same is entrusted to the State whereas 
under Section 494 Cr.P.C if the proceedings are supposed to be 
withdrawn, the same is responsibility of the Public Prosecutor. After 
the promulgation of Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, 1990, the scope of 
aggrieved person has been extended. However, it was only limited 
to the cases relating to bodily harm. The instant case only relates to 
Sections 448/380 PPC, which do not come within the ambit of bodily 
harm, therefore, the extension of definition of aggrieved person is not 
available to said lady in the given circumstances. We have also 
noticed that the petitioner, who is an officer of Pakistan Army has 
been entangled in this case on the basis of material, which prima 
facie does not constitute any offence. Even otherwise, he being a 
member of the services, it seems that there is no chance of his 
absconsion, which aspect further lends support in his favour as far 
as the relief sought for is concerned. Unfortunately, the courts below 
have altogether ignored these aspects, which may intrude the 
concept of safe administration of criminal justice.   
Criminal Petition No. 273-L/2021 
-: 4 :- 
6. 
 
In view of the facts and circumstances narrated above 
and evaluated on the touchstone of criminal justice, we convert this 
petition into appeal, allow it and set aside the impugned order dated 
11.02.2021. The petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his 
furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.200,000/- with one surety in 
the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court. 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Lahore, the 
3rd of January, 2022 
Approved For Reporting 
Khurram