TALIB HUSSAIN Versus State
This is an application under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 through which the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 242 of 2005 registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Bhalwal, District Sargodha. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail where the alleged offence involves the dishonouring of a cheque issued in connection with a business transaction. The Lahore High Court held that the offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, making the grant of bail the general rule and its refusal the exception. Finding no exceptional circumstances to deny bail and noting that the petitioner had been incarcerated since 2 June 2005, the Court accepted the application and admitted the petitioner to bail subject to furnishing appropriate sureties.
- Does an offence under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is grant of bail the rule and refusal an exception in offences not falling within the prohibitory clause?
- What are the considerations for granting post-arrest bail when the trial has already commenced?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 489-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.242 of 2005, dated 25-5-2005 registered under section 489-F, P.P.C. at Police Station Bhalwal District Sargodha, on the application Sh. Altaf Saeed.
2. The brief allegation in the F.I.R. is that the complainant and the petitioner were involved in joint business and a cheque was executed for an amount of Rs.3,88,000 to be drawn from Chowk United Bank on 23-5-2005 regarding the payment of the material which was supplied to them and the said cheque was bounced.
3. Learned counsel for the State contends that the cheque was bounced and the trial has commenced wherein the statement of the Bank Manager has been recorded.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the State and also perused the record. The offence admittedly does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and grant of bail in such-like cases is a rule and refusal is an exception. The petitioner is behind the bars since 2-6-2005. There are no exceptional circumstances in the present case for the refusal of bail to the petitioner. Hence this application is accepted and the petitioner shall be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
H.B.T./T-7/L Bail granted.