PLJ 2024 Cr.C. (Note) 294
[Lahore High Court, Lahore]
Present: Muhammad Tariq Nadeem, J.
ZOBIA RAFIQUE--Petitioner
versus
STATE and another--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 49730-B of 2024, decided on 12.9.2024.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F--
--گرفتاری کے بعد ضمانت--دستیابی--چیک کی عدم ادائیگی--جہاں ایک جرم غیر پابندی والے زمرے میں آتا ہے، وہاں ضمانت کی فراہمی پر غور کیا جانا چاہیے اور اسے صرف غیر معمولی صورتوں میں ہی مسترد کیا جانا چاہیے، لیکن ضمانت کی عدم فراہمی کے لیے کوئی ایسی غیر معمولی صورت حال پیش نہیں کی گئی--درخواست گزار کے خلاف کیس تقریباً مکمل طور پر دستاویزی شواہد پر منحصر ہے جو کہ واضح طور پر استغاثہ کے پاس ہے اور درخواست گزار کے لیے ان کے ساتھ چھیڑ چھاڑ کرنے کا کوئی امکان نہیں ہے--درخواست گزار کو قید میں رکھنا اس بات کے باوجود سزا دینے کے مترادف ہوگا کہ ایک شخص کو بے گناہ سمجھا جاتا ہے جب تک کہ اس کے خلاف جرم ثابت نہ ہو--عدالتیں ہمیشہ دستاویزی شواہد پر مبنی کیسز میں ضمانت دینے کے حق میں رہی ہیں جب کہ یہ شواہد استغاثہ کے پاس ہوں--درخواست گزار اپنی گرفتاری کے بعد سے جیل میں ہے اور اسے مزید تفتیش کے لیے پولیس کی ضرورت نہیں ہے--مزید یہ کہ، اس کا کوئی سابقہ جرم نہیں ہے، لہذا اس کی مزید قید استغاثہ کے لیے کوئی مفید مقصد نہیں رکھتی--ضمانت منظور کی گئی۔
Bail after arrest--Grant of--Dishonoured of cheque--Where an offence falls within ambit of non-prohibitory clause, concession of bail be favour by considered and should only be declined in exceptional cases, but no such exceptional circumstance has been pointed out for refusal of bail--Case against petitioner is almost entirely reliant on documentary evidence which admittedly is in possession of prosecution and there is no possibility of petitioner’s tampering with same--Keeping petitioner incarcerated would tantamount to punishing her despite fact that a person is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty--The Courts have invariably leaned favourably in granting bail when case is dependent upon documentary evidence and same is in possession of prosecution agency--The petitioner is behind bars since her arrest and she is no more required by police for further investigation--Furthermore, she has no previous conviction at his credit, therefore, her further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose to prosecution--Bail accepted. [Para 4, 6 & 7] A, C & D
PLD 1995 SC 34; 2011 SCMR 1708 and PLD 2017 SC 733;
1996 SCMR 1132 and PLD 2008 SC 438.
Recovery of Amount--
----Cheque is negotiable instrument falling within domain of Order XXXVII of CPC, therefore, registration of criminal case under said offence is not to be used as a tool for recovery of amount for which law provides a separate remedy under Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
[Para 5] B
2022 SCMR 592.
Mian Izhar Ahmad, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Muhammad Moeen Ali, DPG for State.
Mrs. Nosheen Ambar Bukhari, Advocate for Complainant
Date of hearing: 12.9.2024.
Order
Through this petition filed under Section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case FIR No. 663 dated 17.05.2024 in respect of an offence under Section 489-F, PPC, registered at Police Station Kotwali, Faisalabad.
2. Succinctly, the facts of the case as spelt out from the contents of FIR are that the petitioner issued a cheque amounting to Rs. 90,00,000/- in favour of complainant for discharging the liability and when the same was presented in the concerned bank for encashment, it was dishonoured. Hence, the FIR.
3. Contentions heard. Record perused.
4. The offence with which the petitioner has been charged is punishable upto three years R.I. or with fine and it does not fall under the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. It has vociferously been contended by learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant that the petitioner cannot claim bail as of right in non-bailable offence. In this context, it is observed that where an offence falls within the ambit of non-prohibitory clause, the concession of bail be favour by considered and should only be declined in exceptional cases, but no such exceptional circumstance has been pointed out for refusal of bail. Reliance is placed upon the case-laws titled as “Tariq Bashir and 5 others v. The State” (PLD 1995 SC 34), “Riaz Jaffar Natiq v. Muhammad Nadeem Dar and others” (2011 SCMR 1708), “Muhammad Tanveer v. The State and another” (PLD 2017 SC 733). “Jehanzeb Khan v. The State through A.G. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and others” (2020 SCMR 1268). “Sheikh Abdul Reheem v. The State and another” (2021 SCMR 822), “Syeda Sumera Andleeb v. The State and another” (2021 SCMR 1227) and “Salman Khan v. The State” (2022 SCMR 515).
5. Moreover, cheque is negotiable instrument falling within the domain of Order XXXVII of CPC, therefore, registration of criminal case under the said offence is not to be used as a tool for recovery of amount for which law provides a separate remedy under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. Reliance is placed upon the case titled as “Abdul Saboor v. The State through A.G. KPK and another (2022 SCMR 592).
6. It may further be noted that the case against the petitioner is almost entirely reliant on documentary evidence which admittedly is in the possession of the prosecution and there is no possibility of petitioner’s tampering with the same. Keeping the petitioner incarcerated would tantamount to punishing her despite the fact that a person is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty. The Courts have invariably leaned favourably in granting bail when the case is dependent upon documentary evidence and the same is in the possession of prosecution agency. Reliance in this regard is placed upon the cases titled as Saeed Ahmed v. The State” (1996 SCMR 1132) and “Muhammad Nawaz v The State through Chairman, NAB, Islamabad and another” (PLD 2008 SC 438).
7. The petitioner is behind the bars since her arrest and she is no more required by the police for further investigation. Furthermore, she has no previous conviction at his credit, therefore, her further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose to the prosecution.
8. In the eventuality of above discussion, this petition is accepted and the petitioner is allowed post-arrest bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trail Court.
9. However, it is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition.
(A.A.K.) Petition accepted
0 Comments