2007 PLP 3090 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 3090 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Najam-uz-Zaman, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ARSHAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | ----S.497---Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Ss.17/22---Bail, grant of, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 3090 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: ----S.497---Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Ss.17/22---Bail, grant of, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 3090 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Najam-uz-Zaman, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 3090 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ARSHAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Fayyaz Ahmed Mahr for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Allegation against the accused was, that he had acted as a sub-agent of the company which had sent the complainant abroad
Admittedly, no direct evidence was available on record to show that the accused was a sub-agent of the said company
Case of accused, prima facie, fell within the ambit of further inquiry entitling him to concession of bail
Accused was admitted to bail accordingly. Muhammad Riaz, S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM -UZ-ZAMAN, J.
Seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.216/2005 dated 6/5/2005 for the offence under sections 17/22 of B.O., 1979 registered at Police Station F.I.A., P.C., Gujranwala.
2. The allegation against the petitioner as penned in the F.I.R. is that he received Rs. 1,30,000 from Bashir Ahmed complainant (intending immigrant) on the pretext of sending him abroad for employment. Allegedly the said commitment was never honoured nor the disputed amount had been returned.
3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I have observed that the complainant of this case was sent abroad by Overseas Employment Promoter running the Company under the name of Versatile International Services. The allegation against the petitioner is that he had acted as a sub-agent of the said company but admittedly there is no direct evidence on record that petitioner is sub-agent of the said company i.e. Versatile International Services. In this view of the matter, prima facie, the case of the petitioner falls within the ambit of further inquiry entitling him to the concession of bail. Accordingly this petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds amounting to Rs.1,00,000 (rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of D.R. (Judicial) of this Bench. N.H.Q./M-45/L Bail allowed.