1985 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑‑S. 498‑‑Emigration Ordinance (11 of 1976), S. 17 --‑Passports Act (XX of 1974), S. 6‑‑Bail‑‑Accused inducing a number of persons to part with large sums of money on pretext of securing visas for their arid sending them abroad for employment‑‑Accused offering to deposit rupees fifty thousand as Security with Court of Special Judge until his liability was determined but special Judge declined to accept offer and kept on insisting direct payment to affected person

of accused not objected to by counsel for State‑‑Accused, held entitled to bail on depositing above‑said amount as security or bank guarantee‑‑Bail granted on said condition. Khalid Ranjha for Petitioner. M. Salim Shad for the State. This is a petition under section 498, Cr.P.C. by Muhammad Azam, petitioner, for bail in a case instituted against him arid three others under section 17 of the Immigration Ordinance read with section 6 of the Passport Act on 2‑10‑1984 at Police Station F. I. A., Faisalabad

2. The, prosecution case in brief is that Muhammad Azam, petitioner with his fattier, step‑mother arid step‑‑brothers induced a number of persons to part with large sums of money, on the pretext of securing visas for them and sending them abroad for employment. According to the joint complaint lodged in the said connection. Muhammad Azam, petitioner is alleged to have received Rupee Fifty thousand (Rs.50,000) from Shaukat Jamil Muhammad Aslam, Ishtiaq, Zaheer, Dilber Hussain and Mirza Muhammad Aslant.

3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. On behalf of the petitioner it is submitted that when the bail petition of the present petitioner was being argued before the Special Judge, the petitioner's counsel had undertaken on behalf of his client to deposit Rupees Fifty Thousand (Rs.50,000) as security with the Court, or in the alternative to furnish Bank guarantee, so that the Court would keep the said money until the petitioner's liability was determined. But the learned trial Judge declined to accept the offer and kept on insisting that direct payment should be made by the petitioner to the aforesaid six persons named in para. 2 above. The learned counsel for the petitioner has re‑asserted the said offer. The learned counsel for the State submits that he has no objection if the same is accepted. In any case, nothing further has to be recovered from the petitioner. In these circumstances, subject to the petitioner, furnishing the financial security, as stated above he is entitled to be released on bail.

4. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is accepted and the petitioner is released on bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rupees Thirty Thousand (Rs.30,000) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge (Central), 4awalpindi, camp at Faisalabad, and also depositing Rupees Fifty Thousand (Rs.50,000) in cash with the said Court, or furnishing a It Bank guarantee in the said amount, within fifteen days from the date of this order, so that the Court can retain the said cash or Bank guarantee until the petitioner's liability is determined in the criminal proceedings before him, it being understood that the said amount would be payable to the persons concerned, when the petitioner is held guilty of receiving the said amounts from all or any of them. M. Y. H. Bail granted.