| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4462 = 2026 SLD 4462 |
Lahore High Court
Crl.Misc.No.33563-B of 2026
Presented By: (Muhammad Amjad Pervaiz) Judge
20.08.2026 M/s Ijaz Ahmad Janjua and Saleem Ahmad Khan Advocates for the petitioner. Ch.Usman Ghani, Assistant Attorney General with Ayesha Masood SI/FIA. Complainant with Mr.Junaid Sarvar, Advocate
Crl.Misc.No.33563-B of 2026
Presented By: (Muhammad Amjad Pervaiz) Judge
20.08.2026 M/s Ijaz Ahmad Janjua and Saleem Ahmad Khan Advocates for the petitioner. Ch.Usman Ghani, Assistant Attorney General with Ayesha Masood SI/FIA. Complainant with Mr.Junaid Sarvar, Advocate
Muhammad Abbas
VS
. The State and another.
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 12
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 497(2), 497(5)
Law: Emigration Ordinance, 1979
Section: 17 & 22
Summary The petitioner sought post-arrest bail under Section 497 Cr.P.C. in FIR No.1047 dated 31.12.2025, registered under Sections 17 and 22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, alleging that in 2024 he and his co-accused received Rs.900,000/- from the complainant on the promise of sending her to Muscat, Oman, for employment, but neither sent her abroad nor returned the money. The Court first held that the Emigration (Amendment) Act, 2025 could not be applied retrospectively, because it changed the punishment from an alternative “imprisonment or fine” to imprisonment and fine, thereby creating a greater/different punishment. Applying Article 12 of the Constitution, the petitioner was entitled to the punishment applicable when the alleged offence occurred in 2024. On the merits, the FIR was lodged after about one year, contained no specific date, time or place of payment, there was no documentary proof that the petitioner received the money, the prosecution witness stated that the amount was paid to the co-accused Iftikhar (proclaimed offender), no incriminating material was recovered from the petitioner, and no evidence showed that he was a beneficiary. The Court therefore found that the petitioner’s guilt required further inquiry under Section 497(2) Cr.P.C., and that continued detention would amount to punishment before trial. Consequently, post-arrest bail was granted subject to bail bonds of Rs.200,000/- with one surety in the like amount. Tagline A penal amendment that increases or changes punishment cannot retrospectively apply to an earlier offence; where the prosecution evidence also creates reasonable doubt requiring further inquiry, post-arrest bail may be granted under Section 497(2) Cr.P.C. ORDER; Through the instant petition under section 497 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case FIR No.1047 dated 31.12.2025 for offences under sections 17, 22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 (hereinafter Ordinance) registered at Police Station FIA/AHTC, Lahore. As per the contents of the FIR, the prosecution story, precisely, is that in the year 2024, the petitioner, along with his co-accused, allegedly fleeced an amount of…