Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that present case is totally false and is a counterblast to the civil suit which was filed by Muhammad Ismail petitioner on 22-1-2002 while application which was submitted by Asghar son of Bashir is dated 25-2-2002, that petitioners have been sent to judicial lock-up no more required by the police for further investigation, that they are not previous convict and their case is of further inquiry falling under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
2. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel F.I.R. Assisted by learned counsel for the complainant submits that both the petitioners had de-frauded the complainant for a sum of Rs.4,20,000 on the pretext that son of the complainant would be sent to Cyprus and ultimately he was taken but after five days he has to come back, that even the refund money was obtained by the present petitioners, that offence falls within the ambit of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. That present petitioners not only de-frauded the present complainant but also other innocent peoples and they are habitual offender.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the y parties. The main point which appeals in this case for the grant of bail to the petitioner is that Muhammad Ismail petitioner filed suit for permanent injunction against Khalid son of Bashir and Sajid Ali son of Ghulam Nabi, even the name of Khalid has been contested by both the parties because according to the complainant party, his name is Asghar son of Bashir and not Khalid son of Bashir while petitioners stance is that his actual name is Khalid son of Bashir. Petitioners have also placed on record certified copy of voters' list in which at Serial No.536 the name of the complainant has been given as Muhammad Khalid son of Muhammad Bashir alongwith his N.I.C. And the address is the same which has been mentioned by the complainant in his application submitted before the F.I.A. Dated 25-2-2002. The date of institution of suit for permanent injunction is one month and three days prior to the submission of application to the F.I.A. By complainant of this case. Even otherwise, according to section 22 of the Emigration Ordinance two sentences are given i.e. 14 years' R.I. Or with fine or both, the word "and" has not been used alongwith 14 years' R.I., nothing incriminating was recovered from the present petitioners either in the shape of cash amount or any other document. They have been sent to judicial lock- up, no more required by the police for further investigation and to my mind, case of the petitioners is of further inquiry falling under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, this petition is accepted. Petitioners are allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs.50,000 (fifty thousand) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Special Judge, Central, Lahore.