Tika Khan vs State

2011 Y L R 1153

[Peshawar]

B e f o r e Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, J

TIKA KHAN---Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE and another---Respondents

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1520 of 2010, decided on 12th November, 2010;

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----S. 497(2)-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.419, 420, 468 & 471---Cheating by personating; cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery for purpose of cheating, using as genuine a forged document---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Record revealed that the Registration Book and the Number Plate of the vehicle used by the accused was fake but question remained as to whether the petitioner or the previous owner had forged the documents of registration of vehicle for the purpose of cheating especially when National Computerized Identity Card of the said previous owner was also found to be fake---Determination of the question as to who committed the offence, required further inquiry entitling the accused to the concession of bail--Alleged offences did not fall within prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C.--- Bail was granted.

Jalaluddin Akbar Azam Khan for Petitioner.

Naveed Akhtar, A.A.-G for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 12th November, 2010.

JUDGMENT

MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.---The petitioner herein being booked in case F.I.R. No.420 dated 20-8-2010 Police Station Takht Bhai, registered under sections 419/420/468/471, P.P.C., through instant application seeks his release on bail after refusal of the same by the fora below. The grounds raised by the accused petitioner through his counsel are that he being innocent has falsely and wrongly been implicated in the case ibid for a crime not committed by him; the petitioner was the bona fide purchaser of the vehicle in question for which he has produced the agreement to sell in his favour before the I.O. and the witnesses of the same were also produced by him; the petitioner in the circumstances is not guilty of offences he is booked in rather he is the person who has been cheated by personation and the vehicle has been delivered to him through cheating. Similarly, neither he has taken part in forgery of any document nor he has used knowingly any forged document with fraudulent or dishonest intention. His case falls under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. requiring further inquiry into his guilt. Besides, the punishment provided for the offence also does not fall in the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Which makes him entitled to the grant of concession of bail.

2.The learned A.A.-G. while opposing the submissions made by the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that it has been established on the record that the petitioner is fully involved in the commission of offence of cheating and is responsible for the forgery. The entire story- floated by the accused petitioner regarding purchase of vehicle having a fake registration number is a concocted one. This alone is sufficient to prima facie establish that the petitioner is using the forged documents of the vehicle as genuine and the vehicle in question was unlawfully imported/smuggled to Pakistan.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.A.-G. for the State were heard and record of the case gone through with their valuable assistance. .

4.The record of the case would reveal that when the local police after conducting inquiry under section 156(3), Cr.P.C. came to the conclusion that the registration of the vehicle .in question bearing No.BC4056/Sindh taken into custody from the accused petitioner is fake and not genuine. The case referred above was registered and the accused was arrested in the case after refusal of bail before arrest by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Takht Bhai.

5.The record of the case would reveal that E.T.O. Motor Registration Wing, Karachi has confirmed that against registration No. appearing on the vehicle in question, in fact another vehicle Suzuki Potohar, Model 1995, was registered in the name of the Karachi Electric Supply Corporation which prima facie establishes that the registration book and number used by the accused petitioner for the vehicle in question is a fake one and not the genuine. This apparently confirms the fact that the offences-mentioned in the F.I.R. have been committed. But the foremost question requiring consideration as to who is the person involved in the cheating through personation or fraudulently delivering the property or whether it is the petitioner using the fake and forged documents of registration of vehicle in question knowingly for the purpose of cheating alone. Whether it is the petitioner, who claims to be the bona tide purchaser of the vehicle or the person who sold the vehicle in question. The copy of the CNIC of the previous owner of the vehicle has also been established to be a fake one. Unless such questions are answered, the case against the accused petitioner becomes that of further inquiry entitling hint to the concession of bail in the circumstances not as a matter of grace but as a matter of right. The other aspect of the case too would make out a case for grant of bail as the punishment provided for the offences does not fall in the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.

6.So, what has been discussed above, instant bail petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.500,000 (Rupees five lass) with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Illaqa Judicial Magistrate/

Magistrate on duty. The sureties shall be reliable and men of means.

7.These were the detailed reasons for the short order of release of accused petitioner. Needless to say that this bail granting order is based on tentative assessment of the material available on the record which will have no bearing on the merits of the case during its trial. As far as fake registration of the vehicle and import/smuggling of the vehicle in question to Pakistan is concerned, for that purpose, law has to take its course.

A.R.K./387/P Bail granted.