IMTIAZ HUSSAIN Versus THE STATE
This application was brought by the petitioner seeking confirmation of ad interim pre-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, relating to dishonoured cheques issued in the course of business transactions. The core legal questions before the Lahore High Court were whether a dispute arising out of commercial dealings and settlement of accounts constitutes a criminal offense or remains civil in nature, and whether pre-arrest bail should be confirmed when the registration of the FIR indicates prima facie mala fide. The Court observed that the matter primarily pertained to a civil dispute over payment of transport charges, making the Civil Court the appropriate forum. It held that the applicability of Sections 468 and 471 PPC required further inquiry, while Section 420 PPC is a bailable offense entitling the petitioner to bail as a matter of right. Consequently, the High Court confirmed the pre-arrest bail, establishing that criminal prosecution should not be used maliciously for settling civil account disputes.
- Whether the registration of a criminal case for a dispute arising out of business dealings and settlement of accounts indicates prima facie mala fide?
- Can pre-arrest bail be granted where the applicability of non-bailable penal sections calls for further inquiry?
- Is an accused entitled to bail as a matter of right when the alleged offense under Section 420 PPC is bailable?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Seeks pre-arrest bail in case F. I. R. No. 154 of 2002, dated 12-5-2002 under sections 420/468/471, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Old Anarkali, Lahore.
2. In nutshell the precise allegation against the petitioner is that he had business dealings with the complainant party. The petitioner with the intention to cheat the complainant party issued some cheques in lieu of the payment which was to be made by the petitioner to the complainant party. The said cheques were dishonoured by the bank.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. The bare reading of the F.I.R. shows that the dispute between the parties is of civil nature i.e. settlement of accounts and proper forum for settling the dispute is Civil Court. The registration of the present case in the circumstances, prima facie, shows the mala fide on the part of the prosecution and the Investigating Agency. Even otherwise, the precise allegation against the petitioner is that while transporting goods from Lahore to Karachi he used to hire vehicles of the complainant company; that about nine lacs and forty-four thousand rupees are to be paid by the petitioner in lieu of said transport charges; that the cheques issued by the petitioner were dishonoured by bank. In the said circumstances of the case, how far the provisions of section 468/471, P.P.C. are attracted calls for further inquiry. Similarly, the offence of cheating i.e. 420, P.P.C., is a bailable offence and as a matter of right petitioner is entitled to get bail in this offence. In this view of the matter, this bail application is allowed and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner by this Court vide order dated 24-9-2002 stands confirmed against the same surety bonds.
H.B.T./I-208/L Pre-arrest bail confirmed.