2011 PLP 1219 (YLR)
Sardar NISAR AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2011 PLP 1219 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rauf Ahmad Sheikh, J |
| Parties | Sardar NISAR AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP 1219 (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 2011 PLP 1219 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rauf Ahmad Sheikh, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 PLP 1219 (YLR) (Sardar NISAR AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rashad-ul-Masawar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.489-F
Dishonestly issuing a cheque--Pre-arrest bail, confirmation of
Allegation against accused was that a cheque of Rs.5,50,000 given by him, was dishonoured on its presentation
Contention of accused was that the matter was referred to Traders Welfare Association with consent of the parties, which after deliberations, decided that a sum of Rs.3,10,000 was due from him to the complainant, which was paid by accused; vide receipt and nothing was due, but the cheque was not returned by the complainant with ulterior motive
Counsel for accused had referred to the proceedings conducted by the arbitrators; and the receipt issued by the complainant
Amount payable under the cheque, in circumstances, was no more due and no dishonesty was committed by accused
Contention of accused that he had been involved in the false case due to malice, was not without weight and could not be ruled out
Ad interim pre-arrest bail granted to accused was confirmed, in circumstances. Muhammad Tanvir Chaudhry for the Complainant. Attiq-ur-Rehman Mani, Standing Counsel. Zafar Iqbal, A.S.-I. with record.
Judgment & Decree
RAUF AHMAD SHEIKH, J.
The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.149, dated 19-3-2010 under section 489-F, Police Station, Shalimar, Islamabad. The allegation against him is that he gave a cheque of Rs.5,50,000 which was drawn on Muslim Commercial Bank, G-1I Markaz, Islamabad on account of price of furniture and fixtures installed in a shop got on rent by him through the complainant and the same was dishonoured on its presentation.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the matter was referred for arbitration to the Traders Welfare Association with consent of the parties, which after deliberations decided that a sum of Rs.3,10,000 was due from the petitioner to the complainant which was paid vide receipt and nothing was due but the cheque was not returned by the complainant with ulterior motive. The learned counsel fir the petitioner has referred to the proceedings conducted by the arbitrators and the receipts issued by the complainant.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent has contended that in fact signatures and thumb impression of the petitioner were obtained on a blank paper and in fact no payment was made and actually an amount of Rs.5,50,000 is still due for which the cheque was issued and on presentation it was dishonoured by the Bank.
4. Signatures and thumb impression on the receipt are not denied. The contention that these were obtained on blank paper through inducement or fraud cannot be accepted at this stage. The parties had referred their dispute to the Traders Welfare Association, G-II Markaz Islamabad and they after hearing the parties and inspection of the record had decided that a sum of Rs.3,10,000 was due which was paid vide receipt. The agreement to refer the matter to the Traders Welfare Association is also available on the file and not denied. In these circumstances, it is obvious that the amount payable under the cheque was no more due and no dishonesty was committed by the petitioner. The contention of the petitioner that he has been involved in the false case due to malice is not without weight and cannot be ruled out. In view of the above facts, the petition is accepted and ad interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner is confirmed subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.one lac with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./N-102/L Bail confirmed.