ABDUL AZIZ MEMON vs The STATE
This petition for leave to appeal was filed by the petitioner, Abdul Aziz Memon, seeking pre-arrest bail in a criminal case registered at Police Station Matyari. The petitioner was accused of defrauding the complainant of Rs.500,000 by providing a fake appointment letter for a Naib Qasid position in the Education Department, which the complainant discovered after serving for two years without pay. The petitioner claimed innocence, asserting the dispute arose from a separate wheat crop transaction, but failed to provide evidence to support this defense. The Supreme Court observed that the incriminating circumstances, specifically the two-year service period and the forged appointment letter, pointed directly to the petitioner's culpability. The Court held that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary equitable remedy intended to protect against the abuse of legal process, not a right to be granted in ordinary criminal cases where it might hinder investigation. Finding the High Court's refusal of bail to be legally sound, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition and refused leave to appeal.
- Is pre-arrest bail an absolute right in every criminal case?
- Can a bald plea of mala fide suffice to grant pre-arrest bail when incriminating evidence exists?
- Does the grant of pre-arrest bail extend to cases where it would hinder the investigative process?
ORDER
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J. Apprehending arrest, Abdul Aziz Memon, petitioner herein, seeks bail in anticipation thereto; he is accused in Crime No.109, registered with Police Station Matyari, on the complaint of Hakim Ali, allegedly duped for appointme nt as a Naib Qasid in the Education Department, in lieu of payment of Rs.500,000. An appointment letter , received by the complainant, turned out a fake instrument after two years service without pay .
Before the Courts below , the petitioner pleaded innocence, citing a dispute over a transaction involving wheat crop for a consideration of Rs.200,000 paid through different bank cheques issued in complainant's favour , followed by a default; the same story is reiterated, nonetheless, in the absence of any proof or investigative support.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. Complainant's futile service as a Naib Qasid at a school for a period of two years, abruptly terminated when the appointment letter provided by the petitioner , upon verification, was found as a forged instrument; two years of service and a fake appointment letter are circumstances, resting upon incriminatory statements, singularly pointed upon petitioner's culpability that he canno t ward off by clamouring a bald plea of mala fide, structured upon denial and a parallel story . Grant of pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary remedy , rooted into equity , to protect the honour and freedom of the innocent in criminal cases actuated by abuse of process of law for oblique motives and purposes; this protection cannot be extended in every run of the mill criminal case without grievously hindering the investigative process. View taken by the High Court, being well within the remit of law, does not call for interference. Petition fails. Leave refused.
Cited by 6 cases
- Atta Mohammad Khuhawar Versus State 2026 YLR 2237
- Roshan Versus State 2025 YLR 2648
- Roopchand alias Ramesh and another vs The State 2025 YLR 827
- Muhammad Shawaiz Abbasi, etc vs The State, etc 2021 YLR 1342, PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Islamabad) 905, 2021 IHC 56
- Jalal Ahmad @ Papi vs State etc PLJ 2021 Cr.C. 1388, PLJ 2022 Cr.C. 59
- KASHIF SHABBIR Versus State 2022 YLRN 179