2009 PLP 1626 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 1626 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Zafar Iqbal Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 1626 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2009 PLP 1626 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Zafar Iqbal Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 1626 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Nawab Ali Mayo for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 498 & 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.489-F
Ad interim pre-arrest bail, confirmation of
Alleged cheque was issued in the year 2007 while the case was registered against accused in 2008, one year after its issuance
During the investigation as pointed out by the Investigating Officer, it was found that the entire payment was made by accused to the complainant
Punchayat was stated to have been convened and on the proposal of accused the complainant refused to give or take oath on Holy Quran in proof of the allegation
Case of the accused, in said circumstances, fell within the purview of further inquiry and possibility of his false implication due to business rivalry, could not be ruled out
Ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to accused, was confirmed in circumstances. Muhammad Anwar Bhatti for Complainant. Mian Ismat Ullah, DPG for the State with Shakeel Ahmad, S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
ZAFAR IQBAL CHAUDHRY, J.--Through this petition under sections 498/ 497, Cr.P.C., Muhammad Rafique petitioner seeks bail before arrest in case F.I.R. No.583 dated 4-8-2008, registered under section 489-F, P.P.C. at Police Station Raiwind Saddar District Kasur.
2. Brief allegation against the petitioner as per contents of the F.I.R. is that he had issued a cheque in the sum of Rs.4,50,000 dated 6-2-2007, to the complainant which was dishonoured on presentation before the concerned Bank.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been involved in this case falsely on account of mala fide of the complainant; that in fact there was a business transaction between the complainant and the petitioner and the cheque was issued to they complainant as a result thereof but subsequently the entire amount was paid by the petitioner to the complainant; that during the investigation it has been proved through evidence that the entire amount was paid to the complainant, who did not return the cheque and only to pressurize the petitioner has falsely involved him in this case, and that the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail before arrest.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposes the bail application on the ground that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail.
5. Perusal of the record shows that the alleged cheque was issued in the year, 2007 while the case was registered against the petitioner in 2008. During the investigation as pointed out by the Investigating Officer it was found that the entire payment was made by the petitioner to the complainant. It is also stated that a Punchayat was convened and on the proposal of the petitioner the complainant refused to give or take oath on Holy Quran in proof of the allegation. Keeping in view such circumstances, the case of the petitioner falls within the purview of further inquiry and possibility of his false implication due to business rivalry cannot be ruled out. Hence, this application is allowed and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11-11-2008; is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. H.B.T./M-18/L Bail granted.