Lahore High Court Grants Post-Arrest Bail to Public Servants in ACE Case: Legal Advocacy by Allah Nawaz Khosa Prevails
Judicial Prudence Ensures Fairness in Corruption Allegations
In a significant development, the Lahore High Court has granted post-arrest bail to three public servants—Abu Awais, Muhammad Waseem, and Husnain Haider—in a case registered under FIR No.41/2015 at the Anti-Corruption Establishment (ACE), District Gujrat. The consolidated decision highlights the importance of evidence-based inquiry, benefit of doubt, and procedural fairness, ensuring that public servants are not unduly deprived of liberty.
Background of the Case
The petitioners were accused of misusing their official authority to obtain a bribe from the complainant in connection with the approval of a map of the complainant’s maternal uncle’s house. However, according to the FIR:
- The map was never approved
- The complainant was not cited as a witness
- No physical recovery of bribe was effected
- Specific dates and times of the alleged occurrence were missing
The petitioners approached the Lahore High Court seeking post-arrest bail, represented by Mr. Allah Nawaz Khosa, Advocate (for Muhammad Waseem)
Legal Considerations
The Court noted:
- The Investigating Officer failed to place on record any material evidence substantiating misuse of authority
- The petitioners are public servants with no likelihood of absconding
- Continued detention served no productive purpose for the prosecution
- The case fell within the ambit of further inquiry under Section 497(2) Cr.P.C.
Citing authoritative precedents such as:
- Salonan Zahid v. The State (2023 SCMR 1140)
- Fahad Hussain & another v. The State (2023 SCMR 364)
- Muhammad Nadim v. The State (2023 SCMR 184)
the Court emphasized that benefit of doubt can be extended even at the bail stage.
The Lahore High Court allowed the consolidated bail petitions of the petitioners subject to furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 2,00,000 each with one surety of the like amount, and noted that these observations were tentative and would not prejudice the trial proceedings.
0 Comments