IMTIAZ HUSSAIN vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a criminal petition seeking pre-arrest or post-arrest bail (referred to as a petition) filed by Imtiaz Hussain against the State. The core legal question revolves around whether an accused charged with defrauding a complainant of a substantial amount through a dishonoured cheque is entitled to the concession of bail. The court held that the petitioner, having defrauded the complainant for an amount of Rs.9,10,500 and failing to ensure sufficient funds in his bank to honour the cheque, is not entitled to any favour or concession. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, reinforcing the principle that financial fraud involving dishonoured cheques warrants a strict approach against granting discretionary relief of bail.
- Is an accused who defrauds a complainant through a dishonoured cheque entitled to bail?
- Does the failure to maintain sufficient funds in a bank account to honour a cheque disentitle the petitioner to concessions from the court?
ORDER has made sufficient funds with his Bank so that the cheque could be honoured. The petitioner has defrauded the complainant for an amount of Rs.9,10,500 is not entitled to any favour/concession.
5. For what has been discussed above, this petition having no force is dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- FARHAJ AHMED vs The STATE 2014 MLD 433
- IMRAN vs THE STATE 2011 MLD 462