PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 6
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 498--Prevention of Electronic Crime Act, 2016, Ss. 20, 21 & 24--Bail before arrest, grant of--Allegation of--Petitioner/accused and co-accused unauthorizedly and deceitfully accessed to complainant’s mobile photos, shared with other employees of MEPCO--The main allegation against petitioner is that he had procured USB of data of complainant, which has been used for transfer of same to other employees of MEPCO and that USB has been in exclusive possession of petitioner, which is yet to be recovered from his possession--Pre-arrest bail is an extra-ordinary relief, which could be extended to innocent persons, who have been entangled in a criminal case on basis of motivated prosecution and in instant case, counsels for petitioner have failed to identify same--Prosecution is equipped with sufficient material/evidence, which prima facie connects petitioner with alleged offence--Pre-arrest bail was confirmed. [Para 3] A
M/s. Syed Riaz-ul-Hassan Gillani and Mian Sohail Anwar Advocates along with Petitioner.
Ch. Shakeel Akhtar Sindhu, Assistant Attorney General for
Rana Asif Saeed, Advocate for Complainant.
Mr. Zeeshan Habib, Assistant Director Cyber/FIR with record.
Date of hearing 7.10.2021.
PLJ 2023 Cr.C. (Note) 6
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Muhammad Waheed Khan, J.
Mian MUHAMMAD SOHAIL AFZAL--Petitioner
versus
STATE etc.--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 5958-B of 2021, decided on 7.10.2021.
Order
Apprehending his arrest at the hands of local police, through the instant petition, petitioner Mian Muhammad Sohail Afzal seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 90/2021 dated 27.07.2021 registered u/S. 20, 21, 24 of PECA, 2016 at P.S. FIA, Multan.
2. Precisely, the story of the prosecution, as set forth in the F.I.R. was that the petitioner and his co-accused, in connivance
with each other, have unauthorisedly and deceitfully accessed to complainant’s mobile and retrieved personal chats and photos, shared the same with the other employees of MEPCO, hence, the instant FIR.
3. After having dilated upon the record, in the light of arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, I noted that the petitioner is named in the FIR with a specific accusation of deceitfully accessing to the complainant’s mobile, retrieving her personal data, sharing the same on the mobile of other co-accused. The allegations levelled by the complainant against the petitioner and others were found true not only during the preliminary inquiry conducted by the Federal Investigating Agency (FIA) but also during the investigation. The Investigating Officer has come to the conclusion during the investigation that the personal Chats and photos of the complainant were available on the mobile of the co-accused Khizar Hayat, which has been taken into possession by the Investigating Officer and sent for forensic analysis. The main allegation against the petitioner is that he had procured USB of the data of the complainant, which has been used for transfer of the same to other employees of the MEPCO and that USB has been in exclusive possession of the petitioner, which is yet to be recovered from his possession. Pre-arrest bail is an extra-ordinary relief, which could be extended to the innocent persons, who have been entangled in a criminal case on the basis of motivated prosecution and in the instant case, learned counsels for the petitioner have failed to identify the same. Even otherwise, the prosecution is equipped with sufficient material/evidence, which prima facie connects the petitioner with the alleged offence.
4. For what has been discussed above, the petitioner is not entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail, hence, the instant petition is hereby dismissed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to him vide order dated 30.08.2021 by this Court is hereby re-called.
(A.A.K.) Bail confirmed
0 Comments