LAHORE:
The Superior Court of Lahore (LHC) rejected a declaration of bail, ruling that “injustice” and “intransigence” of the petitioner justified the dismissal, despite the fact that the alleged crimes do not fall under the category of crimes not possible.
The case involved Tariq Rehman Chohan, who had erroneously appropriate RS3 million transferred to his bank account.
When the bank approached him, the defendant issued a check of the same amount to download his responsibility, but bounced due to insufficient funds. Subsequently, a FIR was presented under section 489-F of the Pakistan Criminal Code (PPC) on the Bank’s Operations Manager complaint.
During the procedures, Chohan’s lawyer argued that section 489-F of the PPC is not under the prohibitive clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC).
He argued that the crime carried an alternative punishment of a fine, that no case was a facie cousin made of the FIR and that the petitioner’s account had been blocked without justification.
He held the failure fell with the bank, justifying the case as an additional investigation.
However, the Prosecutor’s Office opposed the bond, stating that the defendant had appropriated the embezzlement funds transferred by error and deliberately adopt a misleading course.
The law officer said that Chohan was responsible not only under section 489-F PPC but also under section 406 PPC, in relation to the criminal breach of trust.
Judge Tanveer Ahmad Sheikh observed that the petitioner was obliged to inform the Bank about erroneous transfer and organize their performance. Instead, it withdrew RS2.5 million for personal use. “As such a punishable crime with section 406 of PPC completely attracted against him,” said Judge Sheikh.
He added that when the bank pressed to recover the recovery, the petitioner issued a check of 3 million rupees, which was dishonored, putting section 489-F at stake.
