Petitioner Habeeb Ullah seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No.60 dated 29.12.2014, u/s 5/23 FER Act, 1947 r/w 3/4 AML Act, P.S. FIA/CBC, Peshawar.
2. As per prosecution case, the shop of petitioner was raided by the FIA officials on the basis of inquiry No.23/2012 of FIA SBC Karachi, alleging therein involvement of petitioner in illegal business of Hunda Hawala and money laundering where petitioner was found busy in running business of Hundi and Foreign currency without any permission from the competent authority and cash amount of Rs.305,000/- Pakistani currency alongiwith Hundi Hawala documents, and receipts etc were recovered from his possession. Consequently instant FIR was registered against the petitioner.
Arguments heard and record perused.
3. Perusal of record reveals that no test purchase has been conducted by the FIA authorities at the time of raid in order to ascertain the actual truth about involvement of petitioner in the business of Hundi Hawala as well as foreign currency. Besides, no independent witness has been cited on the recovery memo which is clear violation of provisions of Section 103 Cr.PC and Section 19 of FER Act, 1947, showing malafide on the part of complainant/ FIA authorities.
4. The offences with which the petitioners is charged, do not come under the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) Cr.PC and in such like cases grant of bail is a rule and its refusal is an exception. The ultimate conviction and incarceration of a guilty person can repair the wrong cause by as mistaken relief of interim bail granted to him but no satisfactory reparation can be offered to an innocent person for his unjustified incarceration at any stage of the case, albeit his acquittal in the long run. Despite remaining in police custody petitioner has made no confession before the competent Court, connecting him with the commission of offence. He is behind the bar since his arrest and no more required to the FIA authorities for further investigation therefore, keeping him behind the bar would serve no useful purpose.
5. In view of what has been observed above, this petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- (Five Lac) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court concerned, who shall ensure that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means.
The above are reasons of my short order of even date.