YLR 2006

2006 PLP 950 (YLR)

RUKHSAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.9333-B of 2005, decided on 16th January, 2006.
Honorable Judges
M. Bilal Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 950 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members M. Bilal Khan, J
Parties RUKHSAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 950 (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 2006 PLP 950 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: M. Bilal Khan, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 950 (YLR) (RUKHSAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497(2)

Emigration Ordinance ()NIII of 1979), Ss.18/22

Prevention and Control of Human Trafficking Ordinance (LIX of 2002), Ss.3/4

Bail, grant of--Accused according to F.I.R. had sent abroad four out of seventeen deportees

Said four deportees had appeared before the Trial Court and deposed that the accused was not the person who had defrauded them, and while appearing in the High Court they also took the same stand

During investigation no nexus of the accused was found with co-accused, which prima facie had ruled out the possibility of the accused being in league with the co accused

Case of accused, thus, needed further inquiry within the contemplation of S.497(2), Cr.P.C.-Accused was allowed bail in circumstances. Muhammad Riaz, PC/FIA, Gujranwala with Record.

Judgment & Decree

M. BILAL KHAN, J.

Rukhsar son of Muhammad Walayat, the petitioner, by filing the instant petition seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.19, dated 20-12-2002, registered at Police Station, Passport Circle F.I.A., Quetta Zone, Smugli Road, Quetta, for offences under sections 18/22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 read with sections 3/4 of the Prevention and Control of Human Trafficking Ordinance, 2002.

2. Briefly the facts of the case as contained in the F.I.R. were that seventy nine Pakistani Nationals had been handed over to the Pakistani Authorities by the Iranian Authorities, who had been arrested in Iran on the charge of travelling without valid documents; the Incharge Immigration Check Post 'Caftan in his turn handed over those persons to Federal Investigating Agency for legal action; an inquiry was conducted and it was found out that out of the seventy nine deportees, seventeen, whose names with their parentage have been mentioned in the F.I.R., had been sent to Iran en route to Greece by two agents, namely, Haji Ansar and Rukhsar (the petitioner); the deportees, according to the F.I.R., had disclosed that the said agents had cheated and defrauded them by arranging their forged/fake documents under the promise that they would be sent to Greece via Iran. Resultantly, the instant F.I.R. had been recorded.

3. After his arrest, the petitioner applied for his post-arrest bail, which had been turned down by the learned Special Judge (Central), Lahore vide order dated 26-7-2005. Hence, the instant petition.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length and have also gone through the record brought by Muhammad Riaz, S.-I.

5. According to the F.I.R. itself, the allegation against the petitioner was that out of the seventeen deportees, he was responsible for sending four of them abroad. The said four deportees, namely, Imran Hameed son of Hameed Ullah, Ghulam Ali son of Lal Khan, Mohsin Ali son of Mahmood-ul-Hassan and Tahir Abbas son of Ahmad, all residents of Mandi Baha-ud-Din, had appeared before the learned Special judge (Central) and deposed that the petitioner was not the one, who had defrauded them. Likewise they are present in this Court today and reiterated their position, which they had taken before the learned Special Judge. On the Court query, Muhammad Riaz, S.-I., present with record, submitted that during the course of investigation no nexus between the petitioner and Haji Ansar, co-accused, has been found, which prima facie rules out the possibility that the petitioner was acting in cahoots with said Haji Ansar. Keeping in view the position taken by the alleged affectees, the case of the petitioner is rendered one of further inquiry within the contemplation of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.

6. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. N.H.Q./R-2/L Bail allowed.