--S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F--Post arrest bail, grant of--Allegation of--Dishonoured of cheque--Documentary evidence-

 PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 469

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--

----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F--Post arrest bail, grant of--Allegation of--Dishonoured of cheque--Documentary evidence--Entire prosecution case is based on documentary evidence (dishonoured cheque and bank slip), which is already in possession of prosecution and as such there is no chance of tampering with same, therefore, in such circumstances no useful purpose will be served by keeping petitioner behind bars--Punishment provided for offence u/S. 489-F, PPC is imprisonment, which may extend to three years--Offence mentioned in FIR does not fall within ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. and grant of bail in such like cases is a rule while refusal is an exception--Mere involvement of huge amount is no ground to refuse bail to petitioner--Ordaining that where a case falls within non-prohibitory clause, concession of granting bail must favorably be considered and should only be declined in exceptional cases--Bail allowed.           [P. 470] A, B & C

1996 SCMR 1132, 2011 SCMR 1708, 2009 SCMR 1488 &
PLD 2017 SC 733.

Mr. Sajjad Hussain Tarar, Advocate for Petitioner.

Ch. Muhammad Ishaq, Additional Prosecutor General for State.

Mr. Muhammad Sharif Khokhar, Advocate for Complainant.

Date of hearing: 16.7.2021.

 PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 469
[Lahore High Court, Lahore]
Present: Malik Shahzad Ahmed Khan, J.
BILAL AHMED--Petitioner
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 44877-B of 2021, decided on 16.7.2021.

Order

Through the instant petition, the petitioner Bilal Ahmed seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No. 151/2021 dated 21.03.2021, offence under Section 489-F, PPC, registered at Police Station Phalia, District Mandi Bahauddin.

2. Arguments heard. Record perused.

3. As per brief allegations levelled in the FIR, a cheque amounting to Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, issued by the petitioner to the complainant was dishonoured on presentation by the concerned bank, hence the abovementioned FIR.

4. The entire prosecution case is based on documentary evidence (dishonoured cheque and bank slip), which is already in possession of the prosecution and as such there is no chance of tampering with the same, therefore, in such circumstances no useful purpose will be served by keeping the petitioner behind the bars. Reference in this respect may be made to the case of Saeed Ahmad v. The State (1996 SCMR 1132). Furthermore, the punishment provided for the offence under Section 489-F, PPC is imprisonment, which may extend to three years. The offence mentioned in the FIR does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. and grant of bail in such like cases is a rule while refusal is an exception. Mere involvement of huge amount is no ground to refuse bail to the petitioner. Reference in this context may be made to the case of Riaz Jafar Natiq v. Muhammad Nadeem Dar and others (2011 SCMR 1708). Thus, keeping in view the law laid down in the cases of Zafar Iqbal v. Muhammad Anwar and others (2009 SCMR 1488) and “Muhammad Tanveer v. The State and another” (PLD 2017 Supreme Court 733), ordaining that where a case falls within non-prohibitory clause, the concession of granting bail must favorably be considered and should only be declined in exceptional cases and because no exceptional ground has been pointed out by learned Additional Prosecutor General or learned counsel for the complainant to refuse bail to the petitioner, therefore, the instant petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees one million only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

(A.A.K.)          Bail allowed