' After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners and perusing the documents filed by them and also ascertaining facts from the 'Investigating Officer, the case of petitioner No. 1 is that he holds licence for Overseas Employment since 1975 and there is no complaint against him except the one on which a case has been registered against him and his part time General Manager under section 6 of the Passport Act and section 22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979.
2. On the last hearing, I had directed the Investigating Officer that he should examine the registers of business imaintained by the petitioners to fairly evidence the dealings with the persons who come into contact in connection with the employment abroad. The Investigating Officer has stated that though the registers are being maintained , yet they are not in proper shape and form and nothing can be concluded that dealings with the persons who come into contact with agency of petitioner No. 1 are above board. The petitioners are directed to maintain the registers of business in proper shape and form and all the persons who have been examined by the Investigating Officer during, the investigation after registration of the case shall put their claim in writing to the petitioners and it shall be seen by the Investigating Officer that they are properly settled by the petitioners and in case the petitioners are not in a position to finalize their cases within two months or to satisfy their claims otherwise, he should move an application to this Court for cancellation of the bails to petitioners.
3. The problem involved in this case is social and economic and is concerned with number of persons who are keen for employment abroad and petitioners had advertised certain posts and persons who had applied had also made some advances to the petitioners and the petitioners, according to the learned counsel appearing in this petition, had also taken some steps and were still taking other steps when the petitioners were arrested in this case. Shutting them in the jail would not solve the problems of the persons who are keen to go abroad. Their release may be of some help to the persons who have advanced certain amounts to th petitioners to take further steps in the finalization of their cases by the petitioners and actually fulfil their promise given to those persons through advertisement issued in October.
1979.
4. In the circumstances, petitioner No. 1 is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Lahore and petitioner No. 2 is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs. 30,000 with two sureties in the like amount each to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Lahore. But the petitioners shall complete the cases of persons from whom they had taken the advances and who have been examined by the Investigating Officer during the cours of investigation and to finalize their cases within two months and if there is reasonable ground, an application may be made for extention of time to this Court on which Investigating Officer will have the right to file objections.
5. This case would not be a bar to carry on the normal business by the petitioner cm the strength of his licence already issued and valid up to 1980.