Pakistan Case Law
2025 YLR 2350

Shafqat Hussain Versus State

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2025 YLR 2350
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Criminal Bail Application No. 2312 of 2021
Date2021-12-22
Judge(s)Omar Sial
ResultBail grante
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arose from a post-arrest bail application filed by the applicant, Shafqat Hussain, in a case registered under Sections 22(b) and 17(2)(b) of the Emigration Ordinance 1979 at the Anti-Human Trafficking Wing of the FIA. The complainant alleged that he engaged the immigration business Canadian Immigration Expert, owned by a co-accused, where the applicant was employed, paying two installments toward Canadian immigration processing before both individuals became incommunicado. The core issue before the High Court of Sindh was whether the applicant, as a mere employee of the business, was entitled to post-arrest bail on the ground that his nexus to the alleged crime warranted further inquiry. The Court held that the applicant was entitled to bail because the investigating officer confirmed that the complainant's payments went directly into the business's bank account, the applicant was not an authorized signatory, and no evidence showed that any funds reached him. Consequently, his involvement called for further inquiry, and bail was granted against a solvent surety.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is an employee of an immigration consultancy entitled to post-arrest bail when the received funds went exclusively into the business's account and no financial benefit to the employee is established?
  • Whether the lack of authorization over a firm's bank accounts and absence of evidence linking funds to an employee makes the case against him one of further inquiry under bail jurisprudence?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 22(b), Emigration Ordinance 1979
  • Section 17(2)(b), Emigration Ordinance 1979
post-arrest bailEmigration Ordinance 1979further inquiryAnti-Human Trafficking WingFIAimmigration fraudemployee liability

Order

Omar Sial, J .--- Shafqat Hussain has sought post arrest bail in crime number 156 of 2021 registered under sections 22(b) and 17(2)(b) of the Emigration Ordinance 1979 at the Anti-Human Trafficking Wing of the F.I.A. police station. Earlier, his application seeking bail was dismissed by the learned Special Judge (Central) - II at Karachi on 29-11-2021.

2. A background to the case is that the aforementioned FIR was registered on 12-11-2021 on the complaint of Muhammad Hassan Rasool. Although the FIR is lengthy, the complainant Rasool had in essence is as follows:

3. Co-accused Zuhair was the owner of an entity called Canadian Immigration Expert, whereas the applicant is an employee in that business. Rasool approached the business to explore immigration to Canada and after reviewing his paper-work, he was informed that his qualifications make him eligible for employment under a certain immigration program of the Canadian government. Rasool was supposed to pay USD 8000 in four installments for the services of the business. He paid two installments subsequently. Not much progress was made in the matter and after remaining in touch with the complainant, sometime in November 2018 both the accused i.e. Zuhair Ahmed and Shafqat Hussain became incommunicado.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned Assistant Attorney General. The complainant did not effect an appearance. The arguments of the learned counsel is not being reproduced for the sake of brevity but are reflected in the observations below.

5. It is an admitted position that the business was run by co-accused Zuhair Ahmed and that the applicant was an employee at that business. The investigating officer has confirmed that the money taken by the business from Rasool went into the account of the business. She further confirmed that the applicant is not an authorized signatory of the bank account of the business. She also confirmed that during investigation no evidence was found to establish that any of the money taken from Rasool by the business found its way to the applicant in any manner whatsoever. In view of the foregoing findings during investigation, further inquiry is required to establish the nexus of the applicant with the crime complained of. The applicant is therefore admitted to bail subject to his furnishing a solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 100,000 and a P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

MQ/S-51/Sindh Bail grante

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.