2013 PLP 1238 (MLD)
NASEER AHMAD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2013 PLP 1238 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NASEER AHMAD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2013 PLP 1238 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2013 PLP 1238 (MLD)?
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: 2013 PLP 1238 (MLD) (NASEER AHMAD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abid Hussain Bhutta for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F
Allegation against accused was that he had presented a cheque in order to return a loan, which got dishonoured on presentation
Accused contended that cheque in question was not issued for consideration but was only a guarantee for a transaction
Complainant contended that three other similar F.I.Rs. had been registered against the accused in the past, therefore, he was a habitual offender
Mere registration of criminal case of similar nature did not deprive an accused of the concession of bail
Question as to whether the cheque in question was issued dishonestly was a fact which might only be determined after recording of evidence
Offence alleged did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Accused was admitted to bail accordingly.
S. 497
Principle
Registration of similar cases (F.I.Rs.) against accused in the past
Effect
Mere registration of criminal case of similar nature against him did not deprive an accused of the concession of bail.
Judgment & Decree
IJAZ AHMAD, J.
Naseer Ahmad, the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in criminal case F.I.R. No.371 of 2012, dated 1-7-2012 registered under section 489-F, P.P.C. at Police Station City District Khanewal.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that in order to return the loan, the petitioner executed a cheque for the sum of Rs.8,00,
000. When presented to the drawee, it was dishonored.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cheque in question was not issued for the consideration but only as a guarantee for some transaction; that the offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. The grant of bail is opposed by the learned counsel for the complainant, learned Additional Prosecutor-General. It is contended that the criminal cases F.I.Rs. No.417 of 2009 for an amount of Rs.7,00,000, 50/2009 for an amount of Rs. 90,00,000/ and 357/2010 for an amount of Rs.5,00,000 have also been registered against the petitioner at Police Station City Khanewal and that he is a habitual offender.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Prosecutor-General and also gone through the record.
6. Mere registration of criminal case of the same nature does not deprive an accused of the concession of bail altogether. Whether the cheque in question was issued dishonestly is a fact which may only be determined after recording of evidence. The offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. In such like cases, grant of bail is a rule and refusal an exception. In the circumstances, the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to furnishing his bail bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. MWA/N-63/L Bail granted.