2018 PLP 172 (YLR)
ANWAR KHAN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2018 PLP 172 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | Ikramullah Khan, J |
| Parties | ANWAR KHAN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2018 PLP 172 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2018 PLP 172 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: Ikramullah Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2018 PLP 172 (YLR) (ANWAR KHAN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Arshad Hussain Yousafzai for Petitioners.
- 3. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned standing counsd for the State and gone through the record.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947), Ss.4 & 23
Anti-Money Laundering Act (VII of 2010), Ss.3 & 4
Huge quantity of currency was recovered from the car of accused but there was nothing on record to suggest that the money was derived from any illegal business of Hundi/Hawala or other unlawful means
Mere taking/possessing local money was not a crime until and unless the same was proved to be derived from illegal means
Prosecution could not bring any documentary evidence which could depict that accused persons were dealing in Hundi/Hawala business
Alleged offence did not fall within prohibitory clause of S.497(1,) Cr.P.C.
Nothing was on record regarding previous history of conviction or involvement of accused persons in such like offences
Despite remaining in police custody, accused persons had made no confession before competent Court
Accused persons were no more required for further interrogation
Bail was allowed accordingly. Abdul Latif Khan, A.A.G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
IKRAMULLAH KHAN, J.
Through the instant petition, petitioners Anwar Khan and Muhammad Shahab seek their post arrest bail in case FIR No.132/17 dated 21.08.2017 under sections 4/23 FER Act 1947, 3/4 AML Act, 2010, Police Station FIA, CBC, Peshawar.
2. As per contents of FIR the Excise personnel intercepted Motorcar bearing Registration No.5668-LEA being driven by petitioner Anwar Khan while petitioner Muhammad Shahab was occupying front seat of the said car. On search two plastic shopping bags from rear portion (car boot) and one plastic bag from beneath the rear seat were recovered, which on search led to the recovery of Rs.67,00,000/- Pakistani currency. The said currency notes along with petitioners were handed over to the FIA officials and a case vide FIR mentioned above was registered against them.
3. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned standing counsd for the State and gone through the record.
4. No doubt huge quantity of currency has been recovered from the car of petitioners but the said currency was Pakistani currency and there is nothing on record to suggest that the said amount was derived from any illegal business of Hundi/Hawala or other unlawful means, which is a question, cannot be resolved on the basis of material available on record and needs further inquiry under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. Mere taking/ possessing local money is not a crime until and unless the same is proved to be derived from any illegal means. The prosecution could not bring any documentary evidence which could depict that petitioners are dealing in Hundi/Hawala business. The offences with which petitioners are charged, do not fall under the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Besides, there is nothing on record regarding previous history of conviction or involvement of petitioners in such like offences. Despite remaining in police custody, petitioners have made no confession before the competent Court, who are behind the bar since their arrest and no more required to the local police for further interrogation. Consequently the present bail petition is allowed and both the petitioners are admitted to bail provided they furnish bail bonds to the tune of Rs.800,000/- (Eight lac) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Illaqa/Duty Judicial Magistrate concerned, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. The above are reasons of my short order of even date. WA/300/P Bail granted.