ABDUL RASHID and anothers vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for pre-arrest bail in respect of FIR No. 277 dated 3-9-2009 registered under sections 419, 420, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Pasrur City, District Sialkot, concerning allegations of cheating, impersonation, and forgery relating to the fraudulent execution of a power of attorney and subsequent sale of land. The core legal question is whether the petitioners, who merely identified the principal before the Sub-Registrar upon a perceived bona fide belief, possessed the requisite criminal intent (mens rea) to warrant pre-arrest bail. The Lahore High Court held that where the investigation reveals no incriminating evidence or clear mala fides connecting the petitioners to the primary fraud and their role appears susceptible to exploitation by the main accused, the benefit of doubt must be extended at the bail stage. The court confirmed the pre-arrest bail, establishing the principle that tentative assessment of record and lack of clear criminal intent regarding marginal participants in a fraud warrant the grant of pre-arrest bail.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted when the role of the accused in a forgery and cheating case involves the mere identification of a party and lacks clear evidence of criminal intent?
- Does the absence of incriminating evidence by the Investigating Officer justify confirming interim pre-arrest bail?
- Whether benefit of doubt at the bail stage can be extended to an accused whose intentional participation in the crime remains doubtful?
- Section 419, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.--- The learned counsel seeks pre-arrest bail of petitioners in F.I.R.
No,277 of 2008, dated 3-9-2009, under sections 419, 420, 468 and 471 P.P.C., registered at Police Station Pasrur City, District Sialkot.
2. Briefly, according to the F.I.R, the complainant lives in England since 1985. In his absence, his real brother Muhammad Javed Iqbal son of Muhammad Shafi got made a fake Identity Card of complainant and on the basis of the same got prepared a fake power of attorney from complainant in his favour, According to the F.I.R, on the basis of the fake power of attorney, he sold his 73 Kanals, 11 Marlas land in favour of accused Nos.6 to 11 as mentioned in the F.I.R . The precise allegation against the petitioner is that they identified Muhammad Kaleem Akhtar complainant before Sub-Registrar for execution and completion of general power of attorney Deed No,166 on 16- 12-2003.
3. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, petitioner No,1 being a lawyer, prima facie, believed the identity card of the complainant in possession of the accused, Javed Iqbal and identified the execution/completion of general power of attorney. He had no mala fide on his part or acquired any benefit out of the said transaction. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners are ready to support the version of the complainant before any forum as they want to disassociate themselves from any act of co-accused, Javed Iqbal.
4. According to the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, Punjab, during the course of investigation, it has been found out that petitioners did not know that a fraud was being played on part of co- accused, Javed Iqbai, the petitioners were allured and dragged into his matter deceitfully.
5. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that petitioners facilitated the offence committed by co-accused Javed Iqbal, whereby, complainant was caused huge financial loss.
6. I have heard and considered the above contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. According to the Investigating Officer, there is no other case of similar nature, etc. Against the petitioners and investigation in this case has been conducted fairly and honestly. Apparently, the main focus of the F.I.R is at Javed Iqbal, who seemingly took advantage of complainant's absence from the country and hence sold his property by forging documents and in collusion with some revenue officials. It is not clear whether role played by the petitioners Was intentional, mala fide or they have just been exploited by co-accused, Javed Iqbal, in preparation of the fake documents. Since I am doubtful about the role of the petitioners, therefore, giving benefit of doubt to the petitioners, particularly, when the Investigating Officer himself has not come out with any finding or incriminating evidence against the petitioners. In such facts and circumstances, it is difficult to believe whether animus/criminal intention, exists in the actus reus attributed to petitioners.
7. For the above reasons, this bail application is allowed. The interim bail already granted to the petitioners is confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh surety bonds in the sum of Rs,100,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court or Area Magistrate.