' ATTAULLAH KHAN, J.---Petitioners Ehsanullah and Esim Khan, who are charged in a case registered against them and one another under sections 4/23 of the F.E.R. Act, 1947 for having been found in possession of 83520 Saudi Riyal etc., vide F.I.R. No,7/2012, dated 25-1-2012 in Police Station FIA/CBC, Peshawar, have asked for their release on bail mainly on the ground that none of the offences they are charged with attract entail maximum punishment attracting prohibitory clause and that one of the co-accused has already been enlarged on bail.
2. The learned DAG, appearing on behalf of the State, argued that bail cannot be sought on presumptive or hypothetical grounds and that the petitioners being prima facie connected with the crime attracting prohibitory clause do not deserve the concession of bail.
3. I have gone through the record carefully and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.
4. The perusal of record reveals that the petitioners are charged for running a business of Hundi/Hawala in the shop situated in the heart of the city. At the time of raid though certain foreign currency is alleged to have been recovered from the petitioners but the petitioners claimed to be servant of one Gul Mar Jan who has already been enlarged on bail by the lower court vide order dated 1-2-2012. The facts that none of the offences charged with attracts the mischief of section 497, Cr.P.C. And also that one of the co-accused has already been extended the concession of bail, the petitioners' case too, on the principle of consistency alone, is arguable for the purpose of bail.
5. For the reasons discussed above, this petition is allowed and it is directed that the petitioners be released on bail if they furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs, One lac each, with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means.