Muhammad Ishaq vs The State and another
This matter arises from a petition filed under Section 498 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking pre-arrest bail in respect of FIR No. 44/21 registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station City Samundari, District Faisalabad, concerning the dishonour of a cheque issued for the purchase of poultry feed. The core legal question was whether the petitioner made out a case for the extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail where the issuance of the cheque and signatures were admitted, and the defense of the cheque being a mere 'guarantee' or the pendency of a civil suit lacked immediate corroboration. The Lahore High Court held that oral pleas regarding a guarantee cannot outweigh the documentary reality at the bail stage, the mere filing of a civil suit does not warrant pre-arrest bail, and the petitioner failed to establish mala fide or ulterior motives on the part of the complainant. The court laid down the principle that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary remedy meant for innocent persons facing mala fide arrest, and in the absence of malice or ulterior motives, such relief cannot be granted.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be granted solely on the ground that a civil suit seeking cancellation of the disputed cheque has been filed?
- Does an oral plea that a cheque was issued as a guarantee outweigh the written contents of the instrument at the pre-arrest bail stage?
- What constitutes sufficient ground for the grant of extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail in cases involving financial transactions?
- Section 498, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
ASJAD JAVAID GHURAL, J.---Through instant petition under section 498, Cr.P.C, petitioner Muhammad 'Ishaq has sought the premium of bail before arrest in case FIR No.44/21 dated 15.01.2021 registered under section 489- F, P.P.C. at Police Station, City Samundari, District Faisalabad.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he purchased poultry feed from the complainant for an amount of Rs.3,95,07,032/- and in lieu thereof dishonestly issued a cheque of equal amount to discharge his obligation, which was dishonoured on its presentation before the concerned bank. Hence, this case was registered.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner , learned Additional Prosecutor General appearing for the State and perused the record.
4. The issuance of cheque by the petitioner and his signature thereon are admitted one. The plea of the petitioner is that the disputed cheque was infact issued as a "guarantee" but nothing as such is found mentioned in the said cheque, therefore, at this stage, oral submission 6f the petitioner cannot be given credence. As far as submission of the petitioner that he has already filed a civil suit seeking cancellation of said cheque is concerned, suffice it to say that merely on the basis of filing of such suit no case for grant of extra ordinary relief of pre-arrest bail is made out. During investigation, the petitioner has been found guilty . Pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary relief, which is meant only for innocent persons where the intended arrest of an accused is found to be actuated by mala fide on part of the complainant or the police as held by august Supreme Court of Pakistan in case titled "Mukhtar Ahmad v.
The State " (2016 SCMR 2064 )". In this backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any malice or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioner in this case, therefore, he is not entitled to the claim prayed for .
In view of above, the petition in hand is without any merit, the same stands dismissed . Order granting ad interim pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is hereby recalled.