2019 PLP 75 (YLRN)
MUHAMMAD JAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2019 PLP 75 (YLRN) |
| Forum / Court | Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court |
| Bench Members | Malik Haq Nawaz, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD JAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2019 PLP 75 (YLRN)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2019 PLP 75 (YLRN)?
The case was heard and decided by the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court bench comprising: Malik Haq Nawaz, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2019 PLP 75 (YLRN) (MUHAMMAD JAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Wazir Mazhar Hussain and Shabbir Hussain for Petitioner.
- Dy. Advocate General for the State.
- 2. The petitioner was allowed pre-arrest bail by this Court yesterday and the case was posted for today. The learned Dy. Advocate General and I.O. of the case were directed to appear along with the record of the case, who are present in Court along with record of the case.
- 4. The learned Dy. Advocate General opposed the petition and submitted that bail before arrest is an extra ordinary concession, which is extended in very rare and exceptional circumstances. The complainant has been cheated and deprived of a huge amount. The petitioner issued a cheque dishonestly knowing very well that there was no credit in his account.
Headnotes / Summary
S.498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.489-F & 420
Dishonestly issuing a cheque, cheating and thereby dishonestly inducing delivery of property, or making alteration or destruction of a valuable security
Pre-arrest bail, recalling of
Scope
Bail before arrest was an extra ordinary concession, which was to be extended in very rare and exceptional case
Grant of bail before arrest deprived the investigation agency to proceed with the investigation of the case
Accused, if admitted to bail before arrest, rarely co-operated with the Investigation of the case
Petitioner had failed to point out any ill-will or malice on the part of the complainant for his false implication
No case for bail before arrest was made out
Ad-interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the petitioner was recalled. Dy. Advocate General for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.
The petitioner has been booked for the offences under sections 489-F/420, P.P.C. vide FIR No.81/2015 dated 05.08.2015 registered at Police Station City Gilgit.
2. The petitioner was allowed pre-arrest bail by this Court yesterday and the case was posted for today. The learned Dy. Advocate General and I.O. of the case were directed to appear along with the record of the case, who are present in Court along with record of the case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the case is false and the petitioner has been involved in the case with mala fide intention. The complainant turned a civil despite into a criminal one, which is not permissible under law. The offences levelled against the petitioner does not fall within the prohibitory clauses of section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner bail before arrest be confirmed in the given circumstances of the case. The case is of the civil nature and execution proceedings are pending before the Civil Court and the case is fixed for today. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on PLD 1993 SC 82, 2005 SCMR 784, 2008 MLD 159, 2012 MLD 355 and 2013 PCr.LJ 175.
4. The learned Dy. Advocate General opposed the petition and submitted that bail before arrest is an extra ordinary concession, which is extended in very rare and exceptional circumstances. The complainant has been cheated and deprived of a huge amount. The petitioner issued a cheque dishonestly knowing very well that there was no credit in his account.
5. Bail before arrest is an extra ordinary concession, which is extended in very rare and exceptional case. The grant of bail before deprives the investigation agency to proceed with the investigation of the case and the accused if admitted to bail before arrest, rarely co-operate with the I.O. of the case. The petitioner failed to point out any ill will or malice on the part of the complainant for his false implication.
6. No caes for bail before arrest is made out. The bail before arrest granted to the petitioer on 24.4.2019 is recalled accordingly. MQ/51/GB Bail refused.