YLRN 2022

2022 PLP 6 (YLRN)

TANVIR HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)
Decided Date
2021-February-3
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2022 PLP 6 (YLRN)
Forum / Court Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)
Bench Members N/A
Parties TANVIR HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2022 PLP 6 (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 2022 PLP 6 (YLRN)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench) bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2022 PLP 6 (YLRN) (TANVIR HUSSAIN and another — Petitioners Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Malik Nasir Abbas for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Ss. 18 & 22

Passports Act (XX of 1974), S. 6

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.109

Fraudulently inducing to emigrate

Receiving, money, etc. for providing foreign employment

Abetment

Bail, grant of

Scope

Allegation against accused persons was that they received certain amount of sum along with copies of passport, Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC) and driving licence from the complainant to arrange for his job abroad but neither they sent the complainant abroad nor returned the amount

One of the accused, as per prosecution's case, never induced the complainant for payment of any amount in connection with a work visa

Accused persons did not have any previous criminal record

Nothing out of the documents allegedly given by the complainant were recovered from the possession of the accused

Case of accused persons was one of further inquiry into their guilty entitling them to the grant of post-arrest bail

Petition for grant of bail was allowed, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

SYED SHAHBAZ ALI RIZVI, J.

Through this petition, Tanvir Hussain and Dildar Hussain petitioners seek post arrest bail in case FIR No.172 dated 4.12.2020 registered for offences under sections 18 and 22 of Emigration Ordinance, 1979 read with section 6 of Passport Act, 1979 and section 109 of Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station FIA/AHTC, District Rawalpindi.

2. Allegation against the petitioners is that they received an amount of Rs.2,84,000/- along with copies of passport, CNIC and driving license from the complainant to arrange for his job in Dubai but neither they sent the complainant abroad nor returned the amount.

3. Arguments heard. Record perused.

4. It has been noticed that petitioner No.1 even per prosecution's case, never induced the complainant for the payment of any amount in connection with a work visa for Dubai, though he had been allegedly receiving certain amounts from the complainant on behalf of his brother, petitioner No.2. During his physical custody with the Investigation Agency, nothing could be recovered at his instance.

5. To the extent of Dildar Hussain petitioner, though as per crime report complainant transferred an amount of Rs.21,464/- in bank A/c No.000257282189 yet during arguments the Investigation Officer, present in Court, admits that the said account is not owned by petitioner Dildar Hussain rather it is a joint account of some Mst. Irshad Begum and Mehfooz Yousaf. He also concedes, that both of the joint account holders have not yet been joined with the investigation of this case. Prosecution is not equipped with any forensic report with regard to the call recording of the complainant and petitioner Dildar Hussain so far. Petitioners admittedly do not have any previous criminal record. During investigation, nothing out of the documents allegedly given by the complainant to petitioner Dildar Hussain could be recovered at his instance. In this view of the matter, relevance and credibility of the recovery of mere cash amount of Rs.22,000/- at the instance of petitioner Dildar Hussain is yet to be seen by the learned trial court and that can only be done after recording of evidence. These circumstances make the case of petitioners one of further inquiry into their guilt entitling them to the grant of post arrest bail. Hence, this petition is allowed and the petitioners are admitted to post arrest bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court. SA/T-4/L Bail granted.