ALI MURTAZA vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in respect of case F.I.R. No. 934 of 2004 registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station South Cantt., Lahore, concerning the dishonour of a cheque amounting to Rs. 3,40,000. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail when the offence did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and the investigation was already complete. The Lahore High Court held that since the investigation was complete, the challan had been submitted, no recovery was required from the petitioner, and the maximum punishment for the alleged offence was three years' rigorous imprisonment—which falls outside the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898—the grant of bail was the rule and refusal the exception. The court accordingly confirmed the pre-arrest bail, establishing the principle that pre-arrest bail should generally be granted in offences not falling within the prohibitory clause when further investigation is unnecessary.
- Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted when an offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the completion of investigation and submission of challan favour the confirmation of pre-arrest bail?
- Is a petitioner entitled to bail when no recovery remains to be made and further investigation is not required?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Seeks pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,934 of 2004 dated 6-12-2004 for the offence under section 489-F, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station South Cantt., Lahore.
2. In nutshell the allegation against the petitioner is that he had issued a cheque amounting to Rs,3,40,000 which was not honoured when the same was presented before the Bank and the present F.I.R. Was registered.
3. Bail is sought on the grounds that Mahboob Ali (father of the petitioner) owner of Al-Halal Paper Mill had business dealing with the complainant; Mahboob Ali (father of the petitioner) fell sick and was admitted to hospital, the petitioner in good faith to lessen the liability of his father issued cheque in favor of Muhammad Amir Khalid Mian, the said cheque was dishonoured and this case was registered. Submits that about the amount in dispute a civil suit tilted Al Hilal Paper Mills v. Amir Khalid Mian is also pending in the Court of competent jurisdiction and that the registration of this case is nothing but a mala fide act of the complainant. Conversely counsel for the State as well as complainant vehemently opposed the bail application on the grounds that the issuance of cheque by the petitioner has not been denied, thus, the commission of offence under section 489-F, P.P.C.
Stands established from the data available on the record.
4. Heard. File perused.
' The fact that petitioner had issued a cheque stands established from the record of this case but investigation of this case is complete and challan has been submitted before the trial Court. During the investigation nothing was recovered from the petitioner and he is no more required for any further investigation by the agency. The offence A allegedly committed by the petitioner is punishable only with three years' R.I. Which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Grant of bail in such-like cases is a rule and refusal is an exception. In this view of the matter, this petition is allowed and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide order, dated 16-2-2005 stands confirmed against the same surety bonds.