P L D 1989 Karachi 602 (PLP)

Since common question of law is involved in all the above revision applications, they are being disposed of by a consolidated judgment.

2. Applicants Mst. Sher Bano and Habib Khan offered themselves to stand sureties for accused Muhammad Asif, in cases pending before Vth Additional Sessions Judge (South), Karachi. They produced original lease‑deeds of the properties owned by them in support of their solvency. Mst. Sher Bano was not accepted as surety as she appeared to be a poor lady. Habib Khan was also not accepted as surety for almost the same reasons. The orders to this effect passed separately are the subject‑matter of these revision applications.

3. Section 499, Cr.P.C. makes a mention of acceptance of sufficient surety and does not give power to the Court to reject a surety merely on the ground that the surety appears to lie a poor lady. The Court is bound to accept surety, provided she is solvent, reliable and identified. Likewise section 499, Cr.P.C. contemplates execution of bond with sureties and not a cash deposit. The case reported as ' Lakhi Narayan Kunde v. The Crown P L D 1955 Dacca 84, is clear l on this point. ??????????? 4.???????? Rule 16 of Chapter V, Part b of the Federal Capital and Sind Courts Criminal Circulars is relevant in this behalf. It provides:- "When a Court orders the release on bail of an accused person, with surety or sureties, every person offering himself as surety shall produce satisfactory evidence, such as title deeds, a certified copy of an extract from the Record of Rights, deposit receipt, Government Promissory Notes or other evidence of title to property, movable and immovable, of his solvency to the extent of the amount for which bail is to be given, and shall be examined, in the case of Court of Sessions by the Accountant and in other cases by the Nazir or Sheristedar of the Court, on oath or solemn affirmation, touching the value of his property and the debts and liabilities to which the said property is subject. After being examined the papers shall be placed before the Court for directions as to whether the surety he accepted and if the Court directs that the surety be accepted, the surety shall make and file his affidavit of justification and sign the bond: Provided that, in cases where the amount of the bond does not exceed Rs.500, the Accountant of a Court of Session mad be permitted to accept a surety without reference to the Court. 5.???????? As observed in Sajjad Mir and 2 others 'v . The State, reported in 1975 PCr.LJ 532, solvency alone is the determining factor for the; acceptance of the surety. The sureties offered for accused Muhammad Asif had title deeds in respect of immovable properties which they had produced. The learned Additional Sessions Judge had an option to get the title-deeds verified, but it was not open to him to reject them simply on the ground that by appearance one of them was a poor lady. The solvency of a person cannot be judged from her appearance. 6.???????? The impugned orders are again not speaking one. It was obviously for this reason that learned counsel for the State has also 1E not supported the impugned orders. 7.???????? In such view of the matter, the impugned orders cannot be sustained and are set aside. The learned Additional Sessions Judge F is directed to get the lease-deeds submitted before him verified from the concerned authorities, and if the same are found genuine., he should accept the sureties produced before him. ??????????? 8.???????? By a short 'order I had allowed these revision applications and these are reasons in support thereof. M.A.K./S-419/KJ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petitions allowed.