2023 PLP 992 (MLD)
ARSHAD MAHMOOD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2023 PLP 992 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ARSHAD MAHMOOD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2023 PLP 992 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2023 PLP 992 (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: 2023 PLP 992 (MLD) (ARSHAD MAHMOOD — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Younas Bhullar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F
Delayed FIR
Accused, who was arrested for an offense under S. 489-F, P.P.C., applied for bail
Registration of the crime report was delayed for over a year without explanation
It was apparent from the crime report that the accused had business dealings with the complainant
Accused claimed that he did not receive any money from the complainant, but this could be settled by the Trial Court after taking evidence
Since the maximum punishment for the offense under S. 489-F, P.P.C., was not more than three years, it did not fall under the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Bail was the norm in cases like this, and its denial was an exception, but the prosecution could not identify any exceptional circumstances
Accused had no prior convictions or record
Accused had been in jail since his arrest, and the police no longer required his presence for further investigation
Prosecution would not benefit from the accused's indefinite detention in jail
Bail was granted, in circumstances.
S. 489-F
Scope
Filing a case under S. 489-F, P.P.C., is not a means of recovering any outstanding dues from the accused
Instead, civil proceedings offer various remedies, including those under O. XXXVII of the C.P.C.
Judgment & Decree
ALI ZIA BAJWA, J.
Through the instant petition filed under section 497, Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks his post-arrest bail in case FIR No.7929/2022, dated 19.10.2022, offence under section 489-F, P.P.C., registered with Police Station Kahna, District Lahore.
2. Precisely, accusation against the petitioner, as per contents of the crime report is that, he received a loan of an amount of Rs.50,00,000/- from the complainant, and for repayment of the same issued a cheque in his favour, which on presentation for encashment before the concerned bank was dishonored.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. Perusal of the crime report reflects that there is an unexplained delay of more than one year in registration of the crime report. It is evinced from the crime report that the petitioner had business terms with the complainant. It was the contention of the complainant that the disputed cheque was issued by the petitioner for the return of loan amount, whereas, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner that the blank cheque was given to the complainant as a guarantee who tempered the same. He further submits that the petitioner did not obtain any amount from the complainant. However, such controversy would be resolved by the learned trial court after recording of evidence.
5. It is observed that maximum punishment of offence under section 489-F, P.P.C. is not more than three years, as such, the same does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Bail in such like cases is a rule and refusal an exception, but no exceptional circumstances could be pointed out by the learned Law officer as provided in the case of Tariq Bashir
1. The revered Supreme Court of Pakistan in a latest verdict handed down in the case of Abdul Saboor2 held that registration of criminal case under section 489-F, P.P.C. is not a mechanism for recovery of amount due towards the accused rather civil proceedings provide remedies, inter alia, under Order XXXVII of the C.P.C.
6. Petitioner is previously non-convict and non-record holder. He is behind the bars since his arrest, and his person is no more required to the police for the purpose of further investigation. Further incarceration of the petitioner in jail, for an indefinite period, would not serve any useful purpose for the prosecution.
7. Resultantly, the instant bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail after arrest, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. SA/A-31/L Bail granted.