Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2510/B of 1981, decided on 7th October 1981.

-- S. 497 ---Bail, in non-bailable offence - Petitioners allegedly founder aid member of an objectionable organization with irreligious claims and charged for offences under S. 505, Penal Code as well as S. 1 of Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance with maximum penal y of 3 years' and 7 years' R. I.-Counsel for petitioners giving undertaking on their behalf that petitioners would not indulge in any such objectionable activities in future-Petitioners allowed bail, in circumstances.

Mansur -ur-Rahman Afridi for Petitioner.

Malik Muhammad Ashhab for the Complainant.

Irshad Ahmad for the State.

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2510-B of 1981 and Criminal Miscella neous No. 2731-B of 1981 have been filed by Muhammad Yousaf Butt and Hakeem Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioners. Since they are based on the same F.I.R. an# are petitions for bail, they are being disposed of to gether by this order.

2. A case is registered against both the petitioner; alongwith others vide F.I.R. No. 20 /81 dated 29th August, 1981 at Police Station Ravi Road, Lahore, and section 505, P. P. C. and section 16 of the Mainte nance of Public Order Ordinance. The allegation against them is that Hakeem Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner has got printed some pamphlets and booklets in which he has distorted the meanings of the verses of the Holy Qur'an and Kalima and thus bad injured the feelings of the Muslims. It is also alleged that he is the founder of an association called "Alami Tehrik-e-Hikmat-o-Tib Mashriq-o-Islam Pakistan Register ed." Muhammad Yousaf Butt petitioner is member of this association and his name appears in the register of the members of the said associa tion. Muhammad Yousaf Butt petitioner had also been signing the proceedings of the meetings of the association which had been held at the instance of Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner. Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner has also set up a 'Court and has issued notices to the Ulema to appear in the said Court in order to have a Munazara with him. On these notices there are signatures of Muhammad Yousaf Butt petitioner who is his father. Thus, the organization of Hakeem Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner of which Muhammad Yousaf Butt petitioner is a member, is an irreligious and Anti-Islamic organization and it is alleged that his activities are causing anxiety and apprehension in different sects of Muslim. On behalf of Muhammad Yousaf Butt petitioner it was conten ded by his learned counsel that he had contacted Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner only in order to obtain medicines from him because he was a Hakeem. But the Police Offices who are present here and who have brought the record have shown to me that Muhammad Yousaf Butt petitioner was a member of this organization as his name appears in the register of members as well as his signatures appear on the notices issued by Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner to the Ulema. It is contended by learned counsel for the complainant that the said organization was shameful in an Islamic State because its objective was to distort the Kalima and also to misinterpret the verses of the Holy Quran. It is, therefore, submitted that the offence which .is being committed by the two petitioners amounts to Irtedad (apostasy) and that it was an extremely serious offence according to Islamic Law. I have brought to the notice of the learned counsel for the complainant that so far in this Court Irtedad (apostasy) has not been made a punishable offence and that if such an allegation is levelled then it can only be covered by section 505 of the P. P. C. or by section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance. In the case of section 505, .P. P. C. the maximum punishment is seven years and in the case of section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance the maximum punishment is three years. Thus, where persons are charged of such offence, even though they may be non-bailable this Court can release them on bail under section 491 (1), Cr. P. C. It has also been brought to my notice that three other co-accused, namely, Karam Hussain, Muhammad Yameen and Fakhrud Din had already been admitted to bail. Karam Hussain co-accused was allowed bail by Mr. Justice Gulbaz Khan of this Court whereas Mohammad Yameen and Fakhrud Din co-accused were admitted to bail by the Ilaqa Magistrate Learned counsel for the complainant submits that so far as these co-accused are concerned their case was distinguishable from that of the present petitioners for their names did not appear in the register of membership nor were their signatures present on the notices. It was for this reason, according to learned counsel that they had been admitted to bail. Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner according to him was the founder of this objectionable organization with his irreligious claims, whereas Muhammad Yousaf Butt petitioner was a regular member of the organization. Learned counsel for the petitioners gave this undertaking on their behalf that the petitioners shall not indulge in any such objection-able activities in the future if they are admitted to bail. On the assurance of these learned counsel for the petitioners I admit Muhammad Akram Arabi petitioner as well as Mohammad Yousaf Butt petitioner to bail subject to their furnishing security in the sum of Rs. 25 000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Com missioner/Duty Magistrate, Lahore. If after having released on bail they were to indulge in any such objectionable activities the complainant side may move for cancellatibn of their bail. These petitions are dis. posed of.

Bail allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.