Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1098-B/BWP of 1984, decided on 4^th September, 1984.

---S.497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420 & 406--Bail--Accused being detained by police for 14 days after his arrest but amount allegedly misappropriated by him could not be recovered from him--Offence under S. 420, P.P.C., being bailable and offence under S. 406, P. P. C. being punishable with 7 years, not falling within prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.--Bail allowed in circumstances.

---S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 420 & 406--Bail, grant of- Principles--Concession of bail should not be withheld as a punishment.

Malik Muhammad Din for Petitioner.

Ashraf Akhtar for the State.

This is an application for bail by Manzoor Ahmad in case under section 420/406, P.P.C., registered at P.S. Khanpur, vide F.I.R. No.151/84, dated 14-6-1984.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner with four others deceived Juma Khan a blind person and fraudulently /dishonestly induced him to deliver Rs.1,56,600 on the pretext that they will arrange for sending him to Haj and that despite assurance that they will deposit the amount with bank, they did hot do so and criminally misappropriated the same.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as far the offence under section 920, P.P.C., the same is bailable and so far as section 406, P.P.C., is concerned no case of entrustment and misappropriation within the meaning of section 405, P.P.C., is made out. On the other hand, the. learned counsel for the State has opposed the plea for the bail of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner by having deprived a blind man of huge amount valuing Rs.1,56,600 had committed a heinous offence and as such he does not deserve the concession of bail.

4. I have considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the parties carefully. I find that the offence under section 420, P.P.C., is so far bailable. I further find that the offence under section 406 P.P.C., being punishable with seven years' R.I. does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner was arrested, detained by the police for 14 days but the amount allegedly mis-appropriated by him could not be recovered. It is well-settled that the concession of bail cannot be withheld as punishment.

5. For what has been stated above, the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Khanpur.

H. A. K. Bail granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.