PLJ 2024 Cr.C. (Note) 254
[Lahore High Court, Lahore]
Present: Ali Zia Bajwa, J.
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 39176-B of 2024, decided on 19.7.2024.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F--Dishonoured of cheque--Recovery of amount--Bail after arrest, grant of--Invested amount in car showroom--Demanded back--Presented cheque was dishonoured--Dishonestly issued cheque--The Supreme Court also held that question whether cheque was issued towards repayment of loan or fulfillment of an obligation within meaning of Section 489-F, PPC would be resolved by trial Court after recording of evidence--The petitioner is behind bars since date of his arrest and no more required to investigating agency for purpose of further investigation--No useful purpose would be served by keeping accused petitioner behind bars for an indefinite period.
[Para 5 & 6] C & D
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497(1)--Punishment of offence provided under Section 489-F, PPC is not more than three years, as such, same is not covered under sub-section (1) of Section 497, Cr.P.C--To grant bail in such like cases is a rule and refusal an exception--Law Officer and learned counsel for complainant could not point out any exceptional circumstances. [Para 5] A
PLD 1995 SC 34, PLD 2017 SC 733, 2022 SCMR 592, 2022 SCMR 1467 and 2023 SCMR 2122.
Recovery of Amount--
----Wherein Supreme Court of Pakistan held that for recovery of amount, civil proceedings provide remedies under Order XXXVII of CPC, whereas provision of Section 489-F, PPC cannot be used as a tool for recovery of amount in question. [Para 5] B
2023 SCMR 1977.
Mian Izhar Ahmad, Advocate for Petitioner.
Ms. Asiya Yaseen, DDPP for State.
Mr. Abdul Rashid Hijazi, Advocate for Complainant.
Date of hearing: 19.7.2024.
Order
Through this petition filed under Section 497, Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks his post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 2218/2023, dated 17.10.2023, registered under Section 489-F, PP.C. with Police Station Ghallah Mandi, District Sahiwal.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioner as per contents of the crime report is that he dishonestly issued one cheque of Rs. 89,16,750/- in favour of the complainant, which was dishonoured on its presentation before the concerned Bank for encashment.
3. Arguments heard and the record perused.
4. There is an unexplained delay of about one month in lodging the FIR, which shows deliberation and consultation on the part of the complainant.[1] As per crime report, the petitioner was running show room of the vehicles, wherein the complainant invested an amount of Rs. 2,13,20,000/-. After some time, the complainant demanded back his invested amount from the petitioner, who issued two cheques against the outstanding amount, out of which, the complainant presented the cheque in question, which was dishonoured. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after closing the business with the complainant, the petitioner did not issue the cheque in question against any liability or financial obligation. However, such controversy would be resolved during trial after recording of evidence.
5. It has been observed by this Court that maxim punishment of offence provided under Section 489-F, PPC is not more than three years, as such, the same is not covered under sub-section (1) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. To grant bail in such like cases is a rule and refusal an exception.[2] Learned Law Officer and learned counsel for the complainant could not point out any exceptional circumstances warranting dismissal of the instant post-arrest bail petition. Further reliance can be placed on cases titled “Abdul Saboor versus The State through A.G. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and another” (2022 SCMR 592), “Nazir Ahmad alias Bhaga versus The State and others” (2022 SCMR 1467) and “Noman Khaliq versus The State and another” (2023 SCMR 2122), wherein the Supreme Court of Pakistan held that for recovery of amount, civil proceedings provide remedies under Order XXXVII of CPC, whereas provision of Section 489-F, PPC cannot be used as a tool for the recovery of the amount in question. In Noman Khaliq supra as well as case titled “Zafar Nawaz versus The State and another” (2023 SCMR 1977), the Supreme Court also held that the question whether the cheque was issued towards repayment of loan or fulfillment of an obligation within the meaning of Section 489-F, PPC would be resolved by the trial Court after recording of evidence.
6. The petitioner is behind the bars since the date of his arrest and no more required to the investigating agency for the purpose of further investigation. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the accused petitioner behind the bars for an indefinite period.
7. Resultantly, the instant bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
8. It is expected that the trial Court shall conclude the trial of this case expeditiously preferably within three months and in this respect, if the petitioner does not co-operate with the trial Court, it shall amount to misuse the concession of bail, whereupon the complainant or the State will be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of his bail.
(A.A.K.) Petition allowed
0 Comments