2012 PLP 2679 (YLR)

ASSADULLAH KHAN CHAMKANI, J.

Petitioner Fazal Amin seeks his release on bail in case F.I.R. No.789 dated 31-10-2009 registered for offence under section 489-B, P.P.C. at Police Station Hashtnagri District Peshawar.

2. The contents of F.I.R. reveal that the local police of Hashtnagri recovered 94 fake currency notes of Rs.1,000 denomination each total Rs.94,000 having different numbers, fully detailed in the murasila, from the shopping bag of petitioner, which was transporting/carrying in a Hiace from Darra Adam Khel to Punjab, thus, the petitioner was arrested and the fake currency so recovered was taken into possession, hence the case was registered against him.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated in the case as the accused was neither selling, buying, exchanging nor trafficking the alleged fake currency and that no independent witness was associated with the search and recovery proceedings besides the petitioner having no previous history of involvement in such like cases, therefore, on the available record the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel relied on a judgment reported through 2005 PCr.LJ 405.

4. On the contrary, the learned State counsel while opposing this petition contended that huge fake currency amounting to Rs.94,000 has been recovered from the petitioner which he was going to exchange in Punjab and that previously he was allowed bail, which was misused and during the trial he remained fugitive from law for a considerable period, therefore, in this view of the matter he is not entitled to the concession of bail. Arguments heard. Record perused.

5. The record reveals that at the time of his arrest the petitioner was neither exchanging nor buying nor selling nor trafficking the fake currency notes as genuine having knowledge to believe that the same was forged or counterfeit. No independent witness was associated by the police with the search and recovery proceedings though the petitioner was apprehended in a Hiace. Prosecution was yet to prove through convincing evidence in the trial Court that offence with which accused/petitioner has been charged fell under section 489-B and not 489-C, P.P.C. As far as the abscondance is concerned, it was stated by the defence that the petitioner had proceeded to Afghanistan in connection with earning of livelihood and was having no knowledge regarding commencement of the trial, therefore, the absence was not intentional but was due to the said reason. It is settled law that mere abscondance would not hurdle in the way of the petitioner if the case is otherwise fit for the grant of bail. Earlier the petitioner was granted bail by the lower court on merits but having misused the same would not alter/change the merits of the case. The case-law relied upon by the defence is fully attracted to the facts and circumstances of the present case, therefore, reasonable grounds exist to believe that the petitioner has made out a case for further inquiry. For the aforementioned reasons, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted bail in the sum of Rs.400,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court, who shall ensure that the sureties are local and men of means. MWA/265/P Bail granted.