2007 PLP 1779 (YLR)

MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM- UZ-ZAMAN, J.

Seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.241 of 2006, dated 20-6-2006 for the offence under section 17 of Emigration Ordinance, 1979 read with sections 420/468/471, P.P.C. registered at Police Station FIA, P.C., Lahore, on the ground that petitioner is a permanent resident of United Kingdom who had come to Pakistan to visit his relatives and thus under section 27(viii) of the E.O., 1979, the provisions of section 17 of ibid Ordinance would not come into play against the petitioner. Further submits that there is no evidence on the records to show that the petitioner had ever forged the traveling documents and even in this view of the matter there is no evidence on the record to prove the charge against the petitioner under sections 468/471, P.P.C. Conversely learned standing counsel vehemently opposes the bail application.

2. Heard. File perused. According to prosecution's case the real name of the petitioner is Sheikh Saleem Ahmed but he fraudulently had obtained a British passport under the name of Lilu Miah, thus he is guilty of offence under section 17 of E.O., 1979 read with sections 420/468/471, P.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his arguments that the petitioner is a permanent resident of United Kingdom who is also employed there and thus ingredients of section 17 of the ibid Ordinance in view of section 27(viii) of the ibid Ordinance could not be applied against him, has placed on record photo-copies of the debit cards issued in the name of the petitioner by the banks in United Kingdom, his NHS Medical Card etc. The said documents prima facie are sufficient to show that petitioner has settled in the foreign country and was on temporary visit to Pakistan. Thus, by virtue of section 27(viii) of the ibid Ordinance, ingredients of section 17 of the ibid Ordinance would not be attracted against the petitioner. With regard to the remaining offences, I have observed that sections 420 and 471, P.P.C. are bailable offences whereas there is no evidence on the record to show that the petitioner himself had forged the documents in question. Similarly the said offence i.e. sections 468/471, P.P.C. also do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., and it has already been held by the Supreme Court of this country, that grant of bail in such like cases is a rule and refusal is an exception Tariq Bashir and 5 others v. The State (PLD 1995 SC 34). For the said offences petitioner is also entitled to get the concession of bail. Accordingly this petition) is allowed and petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds amounting to Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees One Lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of D.R. (Judicial) of this Court. H.B.T./S-78/L Bail granted.