Muhammad Azeem vs The State And Another
This petition for post-arrest bail was filed by the petitioner, Muhammad Azeem, who was accused in an FIR registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The complainant alleged that the petitioner, acting as a general attorney, agreed to sell land to him, received the consideration of Rs. 4,000,000, and subsequently defrauded him by selling the same land to other individuals and using forged agreements in civil court. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail given the allegations of fraud and forgery. The Lahore High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioner was the main character behind the fraud and forgery and had used the forged documents in court. Furthermore, the court observed that the petitioner was involved in two other similar criminal cases, indicating he was a habitual offender. Since the offence under Section 467 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, bail was denied.
- Whether an accused facing allegations of executing multiple fraudulent agreements to sell the same property is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does the involvement of an accused in multiple similar criminal cases of fraud and forgery disentitle them to the concession of bail as a habitual offender?
- Does an offence under Section 467 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 467, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 409, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 19, Colonization of Government Lands (Punjab) Act 1912
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN, J. ~ Petitioner Muhammad Azeem through the instant petition has prayed for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 820 registered under Sections 420/467/468/471, P.P.C. With Police Station Rail Bazar, Faisalabad on 6.12.2010. It was on the written application of respondent No. 2/complainant.
2. He in the F.I.R. Has alleged that about three years ago, he vide agreement to sell No. 852, dated 8.10.2007 purchased 201-K & 11-M Marlas land in Chak No. 280-R.B., Tehsil and District Faisalabad under Gujranwala Cantt. Scheme from Muhammad Azeem as general attorney in presence of the witnesses for Rs. 40,00,000/-. Muhammad Azeem received that amount and promised to get transferred that land in his favour and to deliver the possession of the same to him. He (complainant) when initiated proceedings to get transferred the land in his name under Section 19 of the Colonization of the Lands Act, Muhammad Azeem with intention to defraud him and mala fide sold that land to Muhammad Saleem, Barkat Ali and Ghulam Farid vide agreement No. 272, dated 17.6.2010. He in connivance with Muhammad Saleem and others used those agreements in Civil Court. He in this way has not only defrauded him but also caused financial loss of lacs of rupees and forged the documents. Hence, the case.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I find that the petitioner as per the story of the complainant in the F.I.R. In the main character behind the above-said fraud and forgery. He according to the same has also used those forged agreements in the Civil Court.
4. He statedly is involved in two other cases of the type. These cases are F.I.R. No. 41 registered under Sections 420/468/471, P.P.C. With Police Station, A-Division, Sheikhupura on 14.1.2009 and F.I.R.
No. 231 registered under Section 409/420/468/471, P.P.C. With Police Station Saddar, Sheikhupura on 17.3.2009.
5. He, thus, ex-facie is a habitual person in the matter of the type.
6. The offence under Section 467, P.P.C. Is covered under the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1), Cr.P.C., I, therefore, see no ground to enlarge him on bail at this stage. The petition, therefore, is dismissed.