Austin Sabir Vs The State etc

Form No: HCJD/C-121

ORDER SHEET

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

(JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT)

Case No. Crl. Misc. No.40200-B/2026 Austin Sabir Versus The State, etc. Sr. No. of order/ Date of order/ Order with signatures of Judge, and that of parties or counsel, Proceedings Proceedings where necessary.

21.08.2026 Mr. Adnan Khalid, Advocate for the petitioner. Miss. Asia Yasin, DPG alongwith Sajid Dogar, ASI. Rana Muhammad Saim Khan, Advocate with complainant.

Through this petition in terms of Section 497 Cr.P.C., petitioner Austin Sabir has sought post arrest bail in case FIR No.765/2026 dated 31.03.2026, for offence under Section 489-F P.P.C., registered at Police Station, Sattokatla, Lahore.

2.As per contents of the FIR, the prosecution story precisely, is that the complainant, in presence of the witnesses, lent an amount of Rs.18,00,000/- to the petitioner in lieu whereof he issued a post- dated cheque worth equal amount, which was dishonoured upon presentation.

3.Arguments heard. Record perused.

4.At this stage of tentative assessment of material, it has been noted that the F.I.R. in this case has been lodged with an unexplained delay of 12-days. It was specifically alleged that the petitioner borrowed huge amount of Rs.18,00,000/- from the complainant in presence of the witnesses for the purpose of sending his wife abroad but neither names and particulars of the witnesses have been mentioned in the FIR nor any such witness joined the investigation. Moreover, the complainant was unable to provide any receipt for the cash amount allegedly received

by the petitioner. Hence, the question whether the cheque was issued towards fulfillment of an obligation within the meaning of section 489-F P.P.C. is a question, which would be resolved by the learned Trial Court after recording of evidence.1

5.This is a case in terms of Section 489-F P.P.C. which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of subsection (2) of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Cr.P.C.). As per settled law, grant of bail in case involving offence falling outside prohibitory clause is a rule and refusal an exception, which may attract in cases where there is likelihood of abscondence of the accused; apprehension of the accused tempering with the prosecution evidence; and the danger of the offence being repeated.2 The exception must be interpreted in a manner to give effect to the spirit of section 497(1) Cr.P.C. as elucidated in the Tariq Bashir case, which envisions that bail be granted as a rule in cases where the alleged offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of the said Section. For instance, bail should not be withheld simply on the basis of an unsubstantiated apprehension that the concerned accused will abscond, unless such apprehension is based on some solid material available on the record, such as past behavior of accused. Even otherwise, where Courts may mitigate such apprehensions by passing appropriate orders, they must do the same rather than simply denying bail to the accused. In case of apprehension of abscondence, the presence of the accused can be ensured by ordering him to submit

2024 SCMR 1596

PLD 1995 SC 34

substantial amount of securities/bail bonds. Similarly, bail should not be withheld solely on the ground that the accused is nominated in other similar FIRs. It is only a previous conviction-duly established through adjudication by trial and not mere registration of other criminal cases, that can furnish a valid ground for denial of bail.3 6. Quantum of amount involved in a case registered under section 489-F P.P.C., could not be treated as an exception to the general rule that in cases falling under the category of non-prohibitory clause, bail shall be considered favorably.4 7. The petitioner was arrested in this case on 26.05.2026, the investigation in this case is complete and physical custody of the petitioner is not required to the police any more for further investigation. Challan has been submitted, prosecution evidence is documentary in nature which is already in possession of the prosecution and there is no apprehension of tampering.5 It is settled law that bail may not be withheld as punishment.6

8.In view of what has been discussed above, the petition in hand is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

9.Before parting with this order, it is clarified that if the petitioner or anyone else acting on his behalf, in any way, delays the conclusion of the trial, the other side (State or the complainant) shall

2025 SCMR 1130

2025 SCMR 1955

2026 SCP 116

PLD 1972 SC 81

be at liberty to file a petition for cancellation of bail.7 (Muhammad Amjad Pervaiz) Judge

Approved For Reporting.

JUDGE

Asif*

2017 SCMR 1936