ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI
Cr. Bail Appln. No.1345 of 2009
Date Order with signature of the Judge
1. For order on office objection a/w reply.
2. For hearing.
--------------------------------------------------
Mr. Khowaja Navid Ahmed, Advocate for Applicant.
Mr. Rizwan Ahmed Dhodani, Standing Counsel.
---------------
Through this application the applicant/accused Ayub Ali seeks bail in crime No.317/2009 for the offence under sections 3(2), 13, 14 of Foreigners Act, 1946 read with section 420, 468, 471, 109, PPC by the Police of FIA, AHT Circle, Karachi.
Precisely, the allegations against the applicant/accused are that he was about to travel on the basis of Pakistani Passport when due to the suspicion, he was arrested and during investigation he confessed to be Iranian National and entered into Pakistan illegally and obtained CNIC and passport through one agent.
The trial Court initially enlarged the applicant/accused on bail, but thereafter, the prosecution on the basis of a letter obtained from Consulate General of Iran confirming the nationality of the applicant/accused as Iranian National moved an application for cancellation of his bail and the trial Court withdrew the concession.
Learned counsel for the applicant/accused placing reliance on the Order of this Court in the case of Ishtiaq Khan vs. The State (SBLR 2008 Sindh 1929) contends that the applicant/accused is in possession of valid Pakistani Passport and CNIC and claims to be Pakistani national, therefore, on the basis of a letter from Iranian Consulate General the veracity whereof is yet to be determined the concession could not have been withdrawn as there was no case of misuse of such concession. It is further contended that the wife and children are also settled in Pakistan and after the arrest of applicant/accused, who is the only bread earner of his family, the entire family is exposed to great hardship. He further states that the applicant/accused is ready to furnish solvent surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel opposes the grant of bail to the applicant/accused on the ground that the concession was rightly recalled by the trial Court on the basis of confirmation letter obtained from Iranian Consulate General.
I have heard the learned counsel for respective parties and have also gone through the case law cited at bar.
The dictum laid down by this Court in the case of Ishtiaq Khan (supra) appears to be that since the applicant/accused has produced a valid CNIC as well as a passport in his name, therefore, unless it is determined that the same were not issued in due process it remains a case of further enquiry and the applicant/accused cannot be termed as Foreigner and the concession already granted could not have been revoked on the basis of a letter the veracity whereof is yet to be determined during the trial. The offence even otherwise does not fall under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The applicant/accused, therefore, is released on bail upon furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac) with P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The trial Court shall be competent to recall such concession in case it is misused.
JUDGE