MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs STATE etc
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 263/2018 registered under Sections 17 and 22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 at Police Station FIA, C.C. Circle, Multan, on allegations of receiving money for employment visas to Dubai but failing to provide the visas or return the funds. The core legal question was whether the petitioner made out a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Lahore High Court held that the inordinate and unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, coupled with the absence of specific dates and times for the alleged payments, brought the case within the scope of further inquiry. The court also considered the petitioner's previous non-convict status, his incarceration period since 12.10.2018, the completion of investigation, and the unlikelihood of the trial concluding soon. The application was accepted and post-arrest bail was granted, establishing that unexplained delay in reporting and lack of specific payment details warrant further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Does an inordinate and unexplained delay in lodging an FIR constitute grounds for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Whether failure to specify the exact date and time of alleged monetary transactions can be a ground for granting post-arrest bail?
- Is a previous non-convict who has joined the investigation and whose trial is not likely to conclude soon entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Section 17, Emigration Ordinance 1979
- Section 22, Emigration Ordinance 1979
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
The Petitioner has been booked in case F.I.R. No, 263/2018 dated 4.7.2018 registered at Police Station, F.I.A., C.C. Circle, Multan District Multan, for offences under Sections 17 & 22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979.
Through this application he seeks post-arrest bail in the said case.
2. Briefly , the allegation against the Petitioner is that in the October 2016 he received a sum of Rs, 700,000/- from the Complainant in two installments to arrange employment visas for him and his brother Khurram Shehzad for Dubai. However , neither he provided them the promised visas nor returned their money .
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. At the very outset, it is observed that there is an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. The alleged occurrence took place in the year 2016 while the matter was reported to the FIA on 2.11.2017. The Complainant has not furnished any explanation for this delay . Further , he has not mentioned the specific time and date when he made the alleged payment to the Petitioner . All these facts put together call for further inquiry within the meaning of Section 497(2), Cr.P.C. to determine the Petitioner's guilt.
4. The Petitioner is a previous non-convict and is behind the bars since 12-10-2018. He has joined the investigation and is not required by the police for any further probe. His trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future. No useful purpose would be served in keeping him in jail for an indefinite period.
5. For what has been discussed above, this application is accepted . The Petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs, 200,000!- (Rupees two hundr ed thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.