ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- Abdur Rehman petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order of the Lahore High Court dated 4-4-1984, granting him conditional bail.
2. The facts briefly, are that Abdur Rehman petitioner was tried along with Muhammad Ali for offences under sections 17, 18 and 22 of the Emigration Ordinance. The allegation against them was that they had extorted considerable amount of money from ignorant persons on the pretext that they would secure jobs for them outside the country and send them abroad. Both of them were convicted for the said offences. Abdur Rehman was sentenced to 2 years' R.I. And a fine of Rs.50,000 or in default whereof further R.I. For one year, while Muhammad Ali co-accused was sentenced to 6 months' R.I. On each count. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Both of them filed an appeal before the High Court and also applied for suspension of sentence under section 426, Cr.P.C. Muhammad Ali was ordered to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount.
Bail was also allowed by the learned Judge in Chamber to Abdur Rehman petitioner in the following words:-- "The sentence of to years is suspended and he is allowed bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) with to sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . , Faisalabad. This bail will be allowed and he will be let out of prison only he pays the amount of Rs.50,000." (The underlines are mine).
3. The petitioner felt aggrieved and filed the present petition 'for leave to appeal against the imposition of the aforementioned condition.
4. We issued notice to the A.G., Punjab, and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we have converted this petition into appeal and proceed to dispose it of as such.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned Judge in Chamber had erred in imposing the aforementioned condition for granting bail. For this contention be relied on the dictum of this Court in Mian Mahmud All Qasuri and others v. The State PLD 1963 SC 478 and Faizur Rahman Sarkar v. The State and 2 others 1970 SCMR 175.
6. We agree with the above-noted submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and find that in view of the above-noted authorities the learned Judge in Chamber could not impose any condition on the grant of bail.
7.It is quite possible that in the absence of this condition the learned Judge may not have granted bail to the petitioner.
In the facts and circumstances of this case we would not like t substitute our own view for that of the learned Judge in Chamber. We would, therefore, request that he may please consider the case afresh and decide as to whether or not he would like to release the petitioner on bail 'without the condition' of payment of Rs.50,000 imposed on him earlier.
8. With these observations the appeal is allowed and the case is remanded to the learned Judge of the Lahore High Court for a fresh decision.