Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 1949 2018 SLD 1949 2018 PLJ 475
Lahore High Court
Crl. Misc. No. 6876-B of 2017, decision & hearing Dated: 07.12.2017.
SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, JUSTICE
Malik Muhammad Jamshed Awan, Advocate vice original counsel alongwith Petitioner. Mehr Nazar Abbas Chawan, AAG for State. Kh. Qaiser Butt, Advocate for Complainant.

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN

VS

STATE AND ANOTHER

Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 498--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 489-F--Pre-arrest bail dismissed--Issuing a cheque--Dishonoured on its presentation--Material available on record was cogent and more than enough to connect petitioner with commission of alleged crime--Scope--This act of petitioner disentitles him from extraordinary concession of pre-arrest bail, petitioner remained failed to show any ill will or enmity of complaint falsely involved him in this case--Prima facie--There existence sufficient incriminating material to connect petitioner with alleged offence--Bail dismissed. Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 498--Pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief to be granted only in extraordinary situation to protect innocent persons against victimization through abuse of law for ulterior motive. Rana Muhammad Arshad vs. Muhammad Rafique and another PLD 2009 SC 427. Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 498--Deeper appreciation of evidence is not permissible in pre-arrest bail--Accused failed to show any ill will or enmity of complainant to falsely involved accused--Prima facie,sufficient incriminating material exist to connect accused. Munir Ahmed v. The State and another 2014 SCMR 1669 & Malik Aqeel v. The State 2011 SCMR 170, ref. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SARDAR MUHAMMAD SARFRAZ DOGAR, JUSTICE---.- - Through this petition, Muhammad Ramzan (petitioner) seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 384/2017, dated 28.7.2017, offence under Section 489-F, PPC, registered with the Police Station City Shujaabad, District Multan. 2. As per FIR lodged on 28.7.2017 by Muhammad Shah Jahan complainant, the allegation against the petitioner is that he borrowed an amount of Rs. 1098720/- from the complainant and for repayment of the game, he issued a Cheque No. 87243697 of said amount which was dishonoured on its presentation. 3. Heard. Record perused. 4. I have scanned the police record with the eminent assistance of learned Law Officer and gone through the contents of the FIR. It is admitted position that the petitioner has issued a cheque with his signatures which was dishonoured on its presentation before the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492