MUHAMMAD RAFIQ vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused, Muhammad Rafiq, in connection with F.I.R. No. 447 of 2000, involving allegations of forgery and fraud under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the nature of the offences and the surrounding circumstances, including a prior settlement between the parties regarding the disputed property. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail. The Court reasoned that the offences charged under sections 420 and 468 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 are bailable, and the remaining offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Furthermore, the Court noted that the genuineness of the disputed sale-deed is a matter for trial, and there were no reasonable grounds at this stage to believe the petitioner committed the alleged offences. The key principle laid down is that where offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, and the guilt requires further inquiry, bail should generally be granted.
- Whether offences under sections 420 and 468 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 are bailable?
- Does the absence of reasonable grounds to believe an accused committed an offence entitle them to bail under section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can bail be granted when the determination of the genuineness of a document requires evidence to be recorded by the trial court?
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 466, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 474, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 479, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered against him vide F.I.R. No,447 of 2000 dated 3-10- 2000 for offences under sections 420/ 466/468/471 and 474 of the P.P.C. At Police Station Lower Mall, Lahore.
2. The petitioner's learned counsel contends that another case was registered against the petitioner vide F.I.R. No,223 of 2000, dated 5-9-2000 for illegal dispossession of the complainant from his house in which sections 420/468/479 of the P.P.C. Were also included,. That the police registered the present case on the report lodged by Muhammad Husnain Jafari, real brother of Iqtedar Hussain, the complainant in the other case; that the petitioner has already handed back the possession of the disputed house to Iqtedar Hussain and the execution proceedings initiated at the instance of the petitioner, have since been consigned to the record; that offences under sections 420/468 of the P.P.C. Are bailable and the other offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Cr.P.C.; that there is no evidence to show that the petitioner had forged the disputed sale-deed; that the petitioner was granted bail in the connected case vide order, dated 10-12-2001 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No,6798/B of 2001.
3. On the other hand, the learned State Counsel submits that the recoveries of stamp papers, court-fee tickets and a number of other items recovered from the petitioner, prima facie, show that he indulges in the practice of preparing false documents; that as per the statement of the Registration Officer, the sale-deed attached by the petitioner with the civil suit was a bogus document.
4. The question whether the sale-deed regarding transfer of the disputed house from the complainant to the present petitioner, is a genuine document or a forged one can be suitably decided by the trial Court after recording evidence. It appears that the contesting parties have since reached some understanding in pursuance of which the petitioner delivered back possession of the disputed house to the complainant and the execution proceedings initiated by the petitioner have been consigned to record. The offences under sections 420/468 of the P.P.C. Are bailable while the other offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Cr.P.C. There may be grounds for further probe and enquiry into the petitioner's guilt but at this stage there are no reasonable grounds for believing that he has committed the offence alleged against him.
5. For the foregoing discussion, the petition is accepted and the petitioner is allowed bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Ilaqa/Judicial Magistrate, Lahore.