Dr. Muhammad Aslam Khan. vs The State & another.
This matter arises from a petition for pre-arrest bail filed by Dr. Muhammad Aslam Khan, who apprehended arrest in FIR No.140 registered under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner stood surety for his son using a sale deed for property he had already alienated to other family members. The core legal question is whether pre-arrest bail should be confirmed where an accused stands surety using an invalid instrument and raises a defense based on an insufficient general power of attorney and a professional medical background. The Lahore High Court held that the general power of attorney lacked authority to pledge the land, that higher professional status does not confer immunity, and that no mala fides could be attributed to the complainant. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition and recalled the ad-interim bail. The key principle laid down is that professional or educational standing does not exempt an individual from criminal liability or serve as a ground for pre-arrest bail when prima facie complicity in fraud is established.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted to an accused who furnished surety using an invalid property deed?
- Does a professional or higher occupational status confer immunity or act as a ground for the confirmation of pre-arrest bail?
- Can a general power of attorney lacking express authority be used to pledge land as security before a court of law?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
Dr. Muhammad Aslam Khan, petitioner herein, apprehending his arrest in a case registered vide FIR No.140 dated 17-3- 2016 under Sections 420, 468, 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 on the complaint of Muhammad Ramzan, Ahlamd to the Court of an Additional Sessions Judge at Multan with Police Station Chehlyak seeks bail in anticipation thereto; he himself was one of the accused along with his son Arslan Khan and some others; the accused were granted ad- interim bail by the said learned Additional Sessions Judge and the petitioner stood surety for his son, in support whereof, he appended copy of a registered sale deed with the bond; upon inquiry, it transpired that the sale deed relied upon related to a property, already alienated by him in favour of his other family members and as such his capacity to stand surety was based upon an invalid instrument. The accusation is being contested on the ground that the petitioner stood surety unsuspectingly and on the basis of a general power of attorney executed in his favour in respect of the same property; his status of a medical practitioner of some standing is yet another plea being pressed into service for confirmation of ad interim bail.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. The general power of attorney sans authority to pledge the land as security before any Court of law and as such reliance thereon is beside the mark. The petitioner being a person possessed with considerable academic and professional background cannot be possibly oblivious of the fact that the property referred to above did not vest in him, as he himself transferred the same. Higher or nobler occupational status does not confer immunity on the beholder to escape consequences of breach of law, on the contrary, it casts a heavier onus on him to abide by it more faithfully. A system of administration of justice, drawing distinctions with different treatments to different sections of society is a travesty. In this backdrop, a Medical Practitioner, traditionally considered as learned and noble, being under the oath of Hippocrates is supposed to set examples to be followed by others, therefore, argument addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be received with approval. No malic or malafide, sine qua non for the relief prayed for, can be attributed to the Ahlmad, a Court associate. Consequently, Crl. Misc. No.2187-B/2-16 is dismissed and ad-interim bail granted to the petitioner is recalled. It is clarified that observations made hereinabove are tentative for the limited purposes of disposal of this bail plea alone and shall not be construed or pressed into service to petitioner's detriment in any manner whatsoever.