۔ 406-گرفتاری سے قبل ضمانت - اعتماد کی مجرمانہ خلاف ورزی-- اعتبار-- - ایف آئی آر میں ساڑھے سات ماہ کی................

 PLJ 2026 Cr.C. (Note) 11

[Lahore High Court, Lahore]

Present: Shehram Sarwar Ch., J.

MUHAMMAD ARIF, etc.--Petitioners

versus

STATE and another--Respondents

Crl. Misc. No. 67375-B of 2025, decided on 24.11.2025.

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

ایس ۔ 498-پاکستان پینل کوڈ ، 1860 (1860 کا ایکس ایل وی) ایس ۔ 406-گرفتاری سے قبل ضمانت - اعتماد کی مجرمانہ خلاف ورزی-- اعتبار-- - ایف آئی آر میں ساڑھے سات ماہ کی تاخیر - - مکان کی خریداری کے لیے رقم - - پیسہ کمائیں - - ڈاک ٹکٹ کاغذ - - پہلی نظر میں ، درخواست گزاروں کو کسی بھی جائیداد کی ذمہ داری نہیں سونپی گئی تھی - - موجودہ حالات میں ، سوال کریں کہ آیا ایک لاکھ روپے کی رقم ۔ 30,00,000/- مبینہ طور پر شکایت کنندہ کے ذریعہ درخواست گزاروں کے حوالے کیا گیا ، تفویض کی تعریف کے اندر آتا ہے یا نہیں ، ثبوت ریکارڈ کرنے کے بعد ٹرائل کورٹ کے ذریعہ جواب دیا جائے گا ۔ - دونوں فریقوں نے ایک دوسرے کے خلاف سول سوٹ دائر کیے تھے ، جو سول کورٹ ، لاہور میں زیر التوا تھے - - درخواست گزار اس طرح کے کسی اور معاملے میں ملوث نہیں تھے - - درخواست گزاروں کو سلاخوں کے پیچھے بھیجنے سے کوئی مفید مقصد پورا نہیں ہوگا - - مذکورہ بالا حالات میں ، درخواست گزاروں کے جھوٹے تاثرات کے لیے شکایت کنندہ کی پارٹی پر بدنیتی سے انکار نہیں کیا جا سکتا - - یہ عرضی قبول کر لی گئی ہے اور درخواست گزاروں کو پہلے سے دی گئی عبوری گرفتاری سے پہلے کی ضمانت کی تصدیق کی گئی ہے-عرضی نمٹائی گئی ۔   

----S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860), S. 406--Pre-arrest bail--Criminal breach of trust--Entrustment--Delay in FIR seven & half month--Money for purchase of house--Earnest money--Stamp paper--Prima facie, there was no entrustment) of any property to petitioners--In attending circumstances, question whether an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- allegedly handed over to petitioners by complainant comes within definition of entrustment or not, would be answered by trial Court after recording of evidence--Both parties had filed civil suits against each other, which were pending before Civil Court, Lahore--Petitioners were not involved in any other case of such like nature--No useful purpose would be served by sending petitioners behind bars--Under above circumstances, mala fide on party of complainant for false implication of petitioners could not be ruled out--This petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to petitioners was hereby confirmed--Petition disposed of.        [Para 4 & 5] A & B

Mian Shahid Abbas, Advocate along with Petitioners.

Sh. Asif Ashraf, DPG for State.

Mr. Nauman Hassan Butt, Advocate for Complainant.

Date of hearing: 24.11.2025.

Order

Muhammad Arif, Raheel Arif and Mst. Shamim Akhtar, petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 740 dated 09.09.2025 offence under Section 406 PPC registered at Police Station Lower Mall District Lahore.

2.       Precisely, the prosecution story as set out in the FIR, is that the petitioners committed criminal breach of trust by misappropriating an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- of the complainant.

3.       Arguments heard. Record perused.

4.       As per FIR, the alleged incident took place on 20.01.2025 whereas the matter was reported to the police on 09.09.2025 i.e. with the delay of more than seven and a half months without there being any satisfactory explanation. According to contents of the FIR, the complainant intended to purchase a house for her daughter and in this regard, the petitioners took Rs. 30,00,000/- from the complainant on the pretext to pay carnest money as and when any deal is stuck. After lapse of three/four months, the complainant insisted the petitioners to return her money as they failed to get purchase the house. Later on, Petitioner No. 1 gave a stamp paper to the complainant by writing Rs. 30,00,000/- as earnest money (biana) of his own house, on its back. As conceded by learned Law Officer prima facie, there was no entrustment) of any property to the petitioners. In the attending circumstances, the question whether an amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- allegedly handed over to the petitioners by the complainant comes within the definition of entrustment or not, would be answered by learned trial Court after recording of evidence. Admittedly, both the parties have filed civil suits against each other, which are pending before the learned Civil Court, Lahore. The petitioners are not involved in any other case of such like nature. No useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioners behind the bars.

5.       Under the above circumstances, malafide on the part of complainant for false implication of the petitioners cannot be ruled out. Therefore, while relying upon case law titled as “Muhammad Amjad Nacem vs. The State through Prosecutor General Punjab and another” (2025) SCMR 1130) this petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioners is hereby confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. Before parting with this order, it is clarified that the observations made in this order are purely tentative in nature and relevant only for the disposal of this bail petition, which shall not influence the learned trial Court in any manner whatsoever.

(J.K.)   Petition disposed of