Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 784/B of 1986, decided on 20th April, 1986.

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Emigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1974), S. 17/22‑‑Passports Act (XX of 1974), S. 6‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Accused had received amount for passing on same onward to real recruiting agents‑‑Persons who were made to part with money were pressing accused to refund their amount whereas accused wanted to recover said amount from real recruiting agents‑‑Accused had already paid sufficient amount to complainant and desired to pay rest of amount also‑‑Registration of case seemed to be a device to pressurise accused to recover amount‑ Interim bail confirmed in circumstances.

Naveed Rasul Mirza for Petitioners.

Ch. Riasat Ali for the Complainant.

Ijaz Qureshi for the State.

Date of hearing: 20th April, 1986.

After hearing the learned counsel at length and having perused the record it has come to light, that in fact the petitioners were merely go between for recruiting agency, who were Dr. Muhammad Shahid and Sajjad Ali Shah. It is admitted by the petitioner, Muhammad Ashraf, that he has received this amount at his nursery in Qaddafi Stadium for passing on this money onward to the real recruiting agents. It is further admitted, that Muhammad Ashraf, petitioner had moved against Dr. Muhammad Shahid and Sajjad Ali Shah which was subject of an inquiry by the F.I.A. (Inquiry No. 4 of 1984). The persons who were made to part with their money are now pressing the petitioner to refund their amount whereas the petitioner wants to recover the said amount from the real recruiting agents. It has been stated by Mr. Riasat Ali, Advocate at the Bar, that the complainant side is not concerned with the real agents and they want to recover their money from the petitioner whom they had paid. It is hard to believe, that the complainant did not know the real recruiting agents, no doubt for them the petitioner would be principally liable. Mr. Naveed Rasul Mirza, Advocate for the petitioner states, that the complainant has received Rs.79,000 by the petitioners through a cheque and Rs.41,500 in cash and similarly the rest of the money can also be paid after arranging the same. It thus, seems, that the registration of this case is a pressure' on the petitioner to recover the said amount. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to recall the order allowing interim bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, the same is hereby confirmed.

H.A.K. Interim bail confirmed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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