Mian Faisal Imran son of Mian Muhammad Hussain and Muhammad Imran Saleem son of Muhammad Saleem, the petitioners, by filing the instant petition seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R.
No, 27, dated 13.1.2006, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Lahore for offences under Sections 406, 408, 420, 468, 471 P.P.C. at the instance of Pir Fareed Ahsanud-Din, Chief Executive, Republic Engineering Corporation (Pvt.) Limited, PAAF Building, Kashmir Egerton Road, Lahore.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as unfolded in the F.I.R. was that, the complainant gave one lac US dollars equivalent in Pakistani Currency to the petitioners and their co-accused, who were running a Money Exchange by the name and style of Mian Money Exchange, to pass on the said amount to his son Pir Saad Ahan-ud-din, who was living in Bahrain; after sometime his son informed him that the said amount had not reached him, whereupon he contacted the petitioners for return of the said amount; they promised to do the needful and in consequence thereof ten thousand US dollars had been returned to him through his servant, but they declined to return the rest of the amount i,e, ninety thousand US dollars and had also issued him threats of life, if he would demand his amount again.
3. The petitioners' plea for pre-arrest bail did not find favour with the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, who proceeded to dismiss their application vide order dated 14.3.2006. Hence, the instant petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that the story as mentioned in the application to the Superintendent of Police, Model Town, Lahore dated 26.3.2006 is materially different from the one as narrated in the F.I.R., inasmuch as the application to Superintendent of Police, Model Town, does not contain any mention that the complainant's son had been studying in Bahrain or that the money was being sent to him; that the petitioners are only small-time money changers and had no authority to transfer money abroad in any manner; that there is an unexplained delay of six years in lodging the F.I.R. that the offence under Section 406 P.P.C. is not made out; that a plain reading of Section 408 P.P.C. shows that the said Section is also not applicable. He argued without conceding that only Section 420 P.P.C. could be said to be applicable and that too to the extent of Aamir Suhail only, who is already under arrest; that there being no allegation of any forgery or preparation of any forged and fake document, the applicability of Sections 468 and 471 P.P.C. can conveniently be ruled out. He finally argued that the whole transaction, if looked at in its true perspective, is a civil transaction and an attempt is being made to transform the same into criminal liability.
5. The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that there is ample material available against the petitioners inasmuch as the witness before whom the transaction had taken place i,e, Sajid Ali Khan, Manager Allied Bank LDA Plaza Branch, Lahore and Sajjad Rizvi, Manager in the complainant's company by the name of Republic Engineering Company have deposed that the transaction had taken place in their presence and that the cash had been given for the purpose of transferring the US dollars to Bahrain, that there are receipts issued by the petitioners available on the record, some of which have been signed by them, which establish their complicity in the transaction.
6. According to the learned State counsel, there is no mala-fide or ill-will on the part of the complainant or the police and that the amount in question is yet to be recovered.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record brought by Imtiaz Sarwar, DSP and Nazar Abbas, Inspector.
8. I have not been able to identify any material different between the allegations as contained in the complainant's application made to Superintendent of Police Model Town, Lahore on 26.3.2002 and the subsequent F.I.R. Insofar as the delay in lodging the F.I.R. is concerned, it has amply been explained in the F.I.R. itself as according to the complainant the petitioners had been putting off the matter on one flimsy pretext or the other and had also paid ten thousand US dollars as part payment towards their liability. Even otherwise it is well-settled principle of law that there is no limitation in a criminal offence. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that no entrustment as envisaged by Section 406 P.P.C. had taken place is also devoid of any force.
Likewise his argument that Sections 408, 420, 468, 471 P.P.C. are also not applicable cannot be considered at this stage, when the petitioner is seeking extra ordinary concession of pre-arrest bail.
It has been observed that there is ample incriminating material against the petitioners in the shape of statements of Sajid Ali Khan, Manager Allied Bank, LDA Plaza Branch, Lahore and Sajjad Rizvi, Manager in the Company before whom the transaction had allegedly taken place. There are also receipts available, which have been signed by some of the accused persons which prima facie establish their complicity in the transaction. The learned counsel for the petitioners has not been able to highlight any special feature of the case entitling the petitioners to the grant of extra- ordinary concession of pre-arrest bail. No malice or ill-will on the part of the complainant or the police has been indicated, which is one of the essential ingredients for the grant of pre-arrest bail.
9. Resultantly, there is no merit in this petition, which is hereby dismissed and the order, dated 17.3.2006, whereby ad-interim pre-arrest bail had been allowed to the petitioners is hereby recalled.