2012 P Cr (PLP)
ZIA ULLAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2012 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ZIA ULLAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 P Cr (PLP) (ZIA ULLAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ms. Bushra Qamar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Punjab Prohibition of Private Money Lending Act (VI of 2007), Ss.2(c), 3 & 4
Prohibition of private money lending
Word "interest"
Scope
Allegation against accused (lender) was that he was running a money lending business for interest against cheques
Complainant (lendee) took money from the accused and voluntarily provided a cheque as guarantee and also transferred a plot in the name of the wife of the accused
Accused allegedly started blackmailing the complainant and filed a case against him under S.489-F, P.P.C. for the cheque provided by the complainant
Contentions of the accused were that there was a delay in lodging the F.I.R.; that complainant wanted to escape his liability which he had undertaken in the form of the cheque provided to the accused; that no incriminating material was recovered from the accused during investigation, and that challan had been submitted against the accused, therefore, his further detention would not serve any useful purpose to the prosecution
Sections 3 and 4 of the Punjab Prohibition of Private Money Lending Act, 2007, prohibited the recovery of interest as defined therein, however, S.2(c) of the said Act did not prohibit other possible safeguards, which an accused might resort to in the form of excessive money
Transactions between parties were voluntary in nature which held both of them equally responsible
Case of accused was one of further inquiry and his further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose of the prosecution
Gravity of offence could be determined at the trial and bail could not be refused to the accused as a punishment
Bail petition of accused was allowed and he was admitted to bail.
Judgment & Decree
ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J.
The petitioner, through this petition, seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.80 of 2012 dated 8-2-2012, under sections 3/4 of The Punjab Prohibition of Private Money Lending Act, 2007 (Act VI of 2007) registered at Police Station, Ali Pur Chattha District Gujranwala.
2. Briefly the facts narrated in the F.I.R. are that the complainant was in need of money for his business, who contacted the petitioner to lend him Rs. 3,00,000 against which he had voluntarily handed over a cheque of Rs.6,00,000 as guarantee to him along with a plot of 10 Marlas transferred in the name of the wife of the petitioner. This concluded the business transaction. However, after a while the petitioner started blackmailing the complainant and filed an application for registration of criminal case under section 489-F, P.P.C. for the cheque already given by the complainant to the petitioner. According to the complainant the petitioner is running money lending business for interest against cheques.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there is delay in lodging the F.I.R.; that the complainant wanted to escape from his liability which he has undertaken in the form of cheque given to the petitioner. Further contended that the order for registration of criminal case in hand by the learned Ex-Officio Justice of Peace is subjudice before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in C.P.L.A. No.173-L of 2012. It was lastly contended that the petitioner is behind the bars since 3-3-2012 and no incriminating material was recovered from him during investigation at the instance of the petitioner; that further incarceration of the petitioner in Jail will not serve useful purpose of the prosecution as the challan has already been submitted in the trial Court.
4. Conversely, the learned D.P.-G. assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer for grant of post-arrest bail by submitting that money lending is against injunctions of Qur'an and Sunnah and that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R.; that the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.; therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. The newly-introduced sections 3 and 4 of The Punjab Prohibition of Private Money Lending Act, 2007 (Act VI of 2007) totally prohibits the recovery of interest as defined therein. In section 2 clause (c) of the said Act it does not prohibit the other possible safeguards, which lender may be resort to in the form of excessive money. All these transactions being voluntary in nature hold both the parties equally responsible. In these circumstances, case of the petitioner has become that of further inquiry and his further incarceration in Jail will not serve any useful purpose of the prosecution. Needless to observe that gravity of offence can only be determined at the time of trial and bail cannot be withheld as a punishment.
7. For what has been discussed above, this petition is accepted and petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. M.W.A./Z-17/L Bail granted.