Aamir Mateen vs State, etc
The petitioner sought pre-arrest bail in a case registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Iqbal Town Lahore, on the allegation of issuing a dishonoured cheque. The core legal question involved whether the petitioner was entitled to pre-arrest bail for an offence of issuing a bogus cheque when prima facie material supported the prosecution's case and no mala fide was established regarding the intended arrest. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner failed to make out a case for confirmation of ad-interim pre-arrest bail, noting that pre-arrest bail is an equitable remedy and not a substitute for post-arrest bail, and cannot be invoked in every run-of-the-mill criminal case supported by incriminating material. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and the ad-interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the petitioner was recalled, laying down that pre-arrest bail requires exceptional circumstances of mala fide and is not a routine alternative to post-arrest bail in documentary fraud cases.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be used as a substitute for post-arrest bail in criminal cases?
- Does the issuance of a dishonoured cheque supported by a cheque return memo warrant the denial of pre-arrest bail?
- Is it necessary to establish mala fide on the part of the investigating agency to obtain pre-arrest bail?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Aamir Mateen, petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case registered vide F.I.R. No. 630/2019 dated 18.06.2019, under Section 489-F , P.P.0 at Police Station Iqbal Town Lahore.
2. Allegedly , the petitioner issued a bogus cheque in favour of the complainant, dishonoured after the presentation.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it was noticed that the incident was reported with reasonable promptitude. The petitioner is nominated in the crime report with specific role of executing a cheque in favour of the complainant, allegedly , dishonoured after its presentation. The version of the complainant is supported by the disputed cheque as well as cheque return memo. The statement of PWs recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. also strengthened the prosecution story . Deeper appreciation of evidence cannot be undertaken at this stage and the Court only has to sift the material in a tentative manner . Even otherwise, pre- arrest bail is not a substitute for post-arrest bail. The apex Court in a recent judgment titled "Ghulam Farooq Channa v. Special Judge ACE (Central-I) Karachi & another " passed in Criminal Petition No. 169 of 2020 observed that remedy oriented in equity cannot be invoked in every run of the mill criminal case, prima facie supported by material and evidence, cons tituting a non-bailable/ cognizable offence, warranting arrest, an inherent attribute to the dynamics of Criminal Justice System with a deterrent impact; it is certainly not a substitute for post- arrest bail. Reliance in this respect can also be placed on "Rang. Abdul Khaliq v. The State and others" (2019 SCMR 1129). Learned counsel for the petitioner also could not establish that his intended arrest was tainted with mala fide. The Investigating Agency confirmed the involvement of the petitioner in this case. In the circumstances, the petitioner failed to make out a case for confirmation of ad-interim bail.
4. In view of the above, there is no merit in this petition which is hereby dismissed. Ad-interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the petitioner is recalled.