Adnan Shehzad vs The State and another
This is a criminal petition filed by Adnan Shehzad seeking post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 1905 dated 22.12.2020 registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Millat Town District Faisalabad, concerning the alleged issuance of a dishonoured cheque amounting to Rs. 50,00,000/-. The core legal question revolves around whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail when the offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and the trial is not in sight. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition, holding that since the offence carries a maximum sentence of three years, does not fall within the prohibitory clause, and the accused is no longer required for investigation, the grant of bail should be favourably considered. The court laid down the principle that Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 is not meant to be used as a coercive tool for the recovery of business debts where civil remedies exist, and bail in non-prohibitory offences is the rule while refusal is an exception.
- Whether post-arrest bail should be granted when an offence under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 falls outside the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 be utilized as a tool for the recovery of money in business dealings?
- Is an accused entitled to bail as a rule when the alleged offence carries a maximum sentence of three years and is not part of the prohibitory clause?
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
SHEHRAM SAR WAR CH., J.--- Adnan Shehzad, petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No.1905 dated 22.12.2020, of fence under section 489-F , P.P.C., registered at Police Station Millat Town District Faisalabad.
2. Precise allegation against the petitioner , as per FIR, is that he issued a cheque amounting to Rs.50,00,000/- to the complainant, which was dishonoured on its presentation in the bank.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. The petitioner was arrested on 22.12.2020 and since then, he is behind the bars. Maximum sentence for the offence alleged against the petitioner is three years. He is no more required for the purposes of investigation by the prosecution. Offence under section 489-F , P.P.C. does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
Section 489-F , P.P.C. has not been promulgated for using as a tool for recovery of the amounts due in business dealings for which civil remedy has already been provided by law. Reliance in this regard is placed on "Zafar Iqbal v. Muhammad Anwar and others " (2009 SCMR 1488 ) and "Riaz Jafar Natiq v. Muhammad Nadeem Dar and others " (2011 SCMR 1708 ). The trial of the above mentioned case is not insight.
5. Thus keeping in view the law laid down in the case of "Zafar lqbal v. Muhammad Anwar and others " (2009 SCMR 1488 ) ordaining that where a case falls within non-prohibitory clause, the concession of granting bail must be favourably considered and should Wily be declined C in exceptional cases. I do not find this to be a case where it should be refused as an exception. Therefore, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is granted post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in D the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 7 cases
- Imran Khan Brohi and another vs The State 2025 MLD 607
- Imran Khan Brohi vs The State 2025 YLR 617
- Kabeer Ahmed Brohi vs The State 2025 MLD 363
- Kabeer Ahmed Brohi Versus State 2025 YLR 1364
- Kabeer Ahmed Brohi Versus State 2025 MLD 364
- Muhammad Tahir Qureshi vs The State and another 2022 IHC 42
- PIR BUX alias ASIF NAWAZ Versus State 2023 YLRN 5