MEHRBAN ALI vs THE STATE and another
This criminal petition for leave to appeal challenged an order of the Lahore High Court cancelling the bail previously granted to the petitioner. The core legal question revolved around the justification for cancelling bail in a case involving serious allegations of fraud, forgery, and extortion where immovable property worth lacs was allegedly usurped through fake documents and a revoked power of attorney. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the petition was devoid of merit and dismissed it, affirming the High Court's order of bail cancellation as the record prima facie established a case against the petitioner. The key principle laid down is that where serious allegations of fraud and forgery involving substantial property are supported by a prima facie case on the record, the cancellation of bail is justified, though the accused may reapply for bail after the complainant's statement is recorded at trial.
- Whether cancellation of bail is justified when serious allegations of fraud, forgery, and extortion are supported by a prima facie case?
- Can an accused person approach the trial court for bail afresh after the statement of the complainant is recorded?
- Does the submission of a challan by itself render the cancellation of bail unjustified in cases involving fraudulent deprivation of immovable property?
ORDER
' JAVED IQBAL, J.---This criminal petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order dated 9- 5-2002 passed by learned Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby bail granted in favour of petitioner has been cancelled.
2. Heard Mr. Rafiq Javed Butt, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner who mainly contended that since the challan against the petitioner has already been submitted thus the cancellation of bail cannot be considered as justified. It is also contended that the allegations as levelled in the F.I.R. Are baseless and without any substance. It is further contended that the petitioner is innocent and no offence whatsoever has been committed by him.
3. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of petitioner in the light of relevant provisions of law and record of the case. We have perused with care and caution the order dated 13-12-2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Samundari, and order impugned. After having gone through the entire record we are of the considered view that very serious allegations of fraud, forgery and extortion have been levelled which are not without substance. The complainant has been allegedly deprived from immovable property worth whereof runs into lacs on the basis of forgery and fake documents allegedly prepared by the petitioner.
There is no denying the fact that power-of-attorney was executed in favour of the petitioner by the complainant which was subsequently withdrawn for certain obvious reasons. A careful scrutiny of the record is demonstrative of the fact that prima facie a case is made out against the petitioner and the order impugned does not call for any interference. As mentioned hereinabove challan has been submitted and accordingly the petitioner would be at liberty to move an application for bail, after the statement of complainant is recorded, which shall be decided in accordance with law and on its own merits. The petition being devoid of merit is dismissed.
' The observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and shall not affect the merit of the case.
Cited by 3 cases
- IFTIKHAR GADAR Versus State 2018 YLR 869
- MUHAMMAD HANIF S. KALIA and 2 others vs THE STATE 2009 P Cr. L J 1192
- MUHAMMAD AKBAR Versus State 2005 PCRLJ 677