SHARAFAT ALI vs STATE and another
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, who was accused in an FIR registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the dishonour of a cheque amounting to Rs. 500,000. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the nature of the offence and the duration of his incarceration. The Court observed that the offence under Section 489-F does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Furthermore, the petitioner had been incarcerated for approximately six months, his presence was no longer required for investigation, and he had no prior criminal history. The Court held that in cases where the offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause, the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception. Consequently, the Court accepted the petition and admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds.
- Does the offence of dishonouring a cheque under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the grant of bail the rule and refusal the exception in cases involving offences that do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
It is stated that the record could not be produced as the Challan has been submitted. This is not a plausible explanation for non-production of the record.
2. The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No. 269, dated 2.05.2011, under Section 489-F, PPC, registered at P.S. Galla Mandi District Sahiwal.
3. Allegedly, the petitioner issued a cheque for the sum of Rs.500,000/- which was dishonoured on its presentation in the bank.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner has been roped in the false case with malice; that the petitioner does not bear history of involvement in such cases in the past; that the petitioner is non-convict previously and that he is behind the bars for the last about six months but the trial has not commenced.
5. The complainant has not appeared in spite of his personal service.
6. Learned DPG has vehemently opposed the petition. It is urged that the petitioner dishonestly issued the cheque which was dis-honoured by the bank. It is, however, stated that as per information given by the I.O. he does not bear history of involvement in such cases in the past.
7. The offence punishable under Section 489-F, PPC does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner is behind the bars for the last about six months and his person is no more required for further investigation. It is admitted that he does not bear of involvement in such cases in the past. Grant of bail in such cases is a rule and refusal thereof an exception.
8. For the reasons supra, the petition is accepted and petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the, sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to