2022 PLP 737 (SCMR)
SHAHID ASLAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2022 PLP 737 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Maqbool Baqar, Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed and Amin-ud-Din Khan, JJ |
| Parties | SHAHID ASLAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2022 PLP 737 (SCMR)?
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 737 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Maqbool Baqar, Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed and Amin-ud-Din Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2022 PLP 737 (SCMR) (SHAHID ASLAM — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mazhar Iqbal Sidhu, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Ch. Abdul Wahid, Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Ghulam Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the order dated 5.8.2021 passed by the Lahore High Court Lahore in Crl. Misc. No. 450305-B of 2021)
S. 497
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 185(3)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F
Judge-in-Chamber of High Court granting bail to accused after the latter pledged to compensate the complainant and submitted a cheque of the disputed amount
Judge-in-Chamber denied post arrest bail to the accused on his failure to keep his pledge to compensate the complainant, when the cheque presented by the accused bounced on presentation
Such an arrangement, seemingly under the sword of Damocles could not be approved, inasmuch as, the Court being a neutral arbiter owed responsibility to none except the law
Parameters for grant of bail were authoritatively well settled, and were to be followed faithfully and, thus, there was no space to be allocated to the accused to barter his freedom, in derogation thereof
Furthermore accused was charged with an offence that did not attract the statutory bar of denial of bail
Accused was in custody since more than six months, continuation whereof, was not likely to serve any useful purpose preceding final adjudication
Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and allowed, and accused was admitted to bail. Rana Abdul Majid, Additional Prosecutor General Punjab with Bilal Mehmood Sulehri, ASP and Javed, I.O. for the State. Ch. Abdul Wahid, Advocate Supreme Court and Mian Ghulam Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.
Shahid Aslam, petitioner herein, was earlier booked by Green Town police Lahore for issuing a bank cheque in sum of rupees 7 million, bounced upon presentation. It is in this backdrop that he settled the issue by issuing another cheque in favour of the complainant before a learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Lahore High Court Lahore, in consequence whereof, he was admitted to anticipatory bail vide order dated 11.8.2014; the second cheque also failed upon presentation, bringing him back once again behind the bars on 14.6.2021.
2. Chequered successive failures, notwithstanding, the learned counsel contends that the petitioner had cleared up substantial portion of his liability, a position though contested at the bar, nonetheless, confirmed by Bilal Mehmood Sulehri, Assistant Superintendent of Police.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. Be that as it may, what appears to have weighed with the learned Judge-in-Chamber to deny post-arrest bail to the petitioner is his failure to recompense the complainant, a pledge that he made before the Court, in lieu whereof, he was extended extraordinary concession of pre-arrest bail. The arrangement, seemingly under the sword of democles fails to commend our approval, inasmuch as, the Court being a neutral arbiter owed responsibility to none except the law. Parameters for grant of pre-arrest bail, by now, are authoritatively well settled, to be followed faithfully and, thus, there was no space to be allocated to the petitioner to barter his freedom, in derogation thereof; petitioner's unenviable conduct, notwithstanding, nonetheless, does not alter the above juridical position. Charged with an offence that does not attract the statutory bar, the petitioner is in custody since 14.6.2021, continuation whereof, is not likely to serve any useful purpose preceding final adjudication; as case for his release on bail stands made out. Criminal Petition is converted into appeal and allowed; the petitioner/appellant is admitted to bail on his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. MWA/S-1/SC Bail granted.