NOMAN TAHIR vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, arising from an F.I.R. registered under Section 489-B of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The petitioners were accused of attempting to use a counterfeit five-hundred rupee note at a petrol pump. The core legal question was whether the mere presentation of a counterfeit note, absent evidence of the petitioners' involvement in its preparation or intentional forgery, warranted the denial of bail. The Court held that the prosecution failed to provide evidence linking the petitioners to the actual preparation of the forged currency. Furthermore, the complainant filed an affidavit stating the note was not produced intentionally. Consequently, the Court determined that the petitioners' case fell under the category of further inquiry as contemplated by Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Court established the principle that bail should not be withheld as a form of punishment, particularly when there is no evidence of prior involvement in similar offences and no further recoveries are required.
- Does the mere presentation of a counterfeit note, without evidence of its preparation by the accused, constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail under Section 489-B of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- When does a case qualify for 'further inquiry' under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be withheld as a form of punishment in criminal proceedings?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 489-B, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.---Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioners seek bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,625 dated 3-9-2005 registered under section 489-B, P.P.C. At Police Station South Cantt. Lahore, on the statement of Ghulam Nabi.
2. The brief allegation in the F.I.R. Is that on 3-9-2005 at 8-15 p.m. The petitioners came to the Petrol Pump while riding on motorcycle and asked for filling of petrol of Rs,50. The petitioners handed over a note of the denomination of Rs,500 which was counterfeit. The cashier namely Zafar Iqbal returned the note while declaring that it is counterfeit while the petitioners started making quarrel due to which the cashier again took back the note from them. The petitioner have committed the highhandedness by producing the counterfeit note and making quarrel.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated who received the currency note of Rs,500 from someone and when tried to make the payment of the Petrol Pump, this case has been falsely registered against them but there is no evidence that the petitioners have prepared this fake note. Affidavit has also been sworn by the complainant that the petitioners did not produce the note intentionally.
4. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand opposes this application.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. The prosecution during investigation has failed to collect any evidence that this fake note was prepared by the petitioners and regarding the possession of the note it is being explained that they received the said note from some customer and further made the payment. In the absence of any other evidence that the petitioners themselves were responsible for the preparation of the said forged note, mere presentation of the said counterfeit note at the Petrol Pump is not sufficient to prima facie make out the offence under section 489-B, P.P.C. Hence, the case of the petitioners is of further inquiry and is covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioners are not previously involved in such-like cases, who are behind the bars and nothing is to be recovered from them. Bail cannot be withheld as a punishment. Hence, this application is accepted and the petitioners are allowed to be released on bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial/Maga Magistrate.