IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH 
MR. JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.957 OF 2021 
(Against the order dated 03.08.2021 of the 
Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Crl. 
Misc. No. 45363-B/2021) 
 
 
Muhammad Nasir Shafique 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
Versus 
The State through Prosecutor General Punjab and another 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Asghar Ali Gill, ASC 
Syeda B. H. Shah, AOR 
 
 
For the State: 
Mirza Muhammad Usman, D.P.G. 
Mr. Muhammad Aslam, S.I.  
 
 
For Respondent No.2: 
In person 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
23.09.2021 
 
ORDER 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.- This petition under Article 
185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 has 
been filed against the order dated 03.08.2021 passed by the learned 
Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby the post-arrest bail was declined to 
the petitioner. 
2. 
 
As per contents of the crime report bearing FIR No.1258/20 
dated 03.10.2020 registered under Sections 489-F PPC at Police Station 
Sargodha Road, Faisalabad lodged by Asif Ali it was alleged that the 
petitioner borrowed Rs.70,00,000/- from him due to previous 
relationship to buy a house from his brothers. The petitioner issued a 
cheque to the complainant against the borrowed amount which on 
presentation was dishonored resulting into lodging of the aforesaid 
crime report.  
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.957 OF 2021 
-: 2 :- 
3. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently 
contended that in fact the story narrated in the crime report is false. 
Contends that the amount which is alleged against the petitioner is an 
afterthought and as such the petitioner is not liable for the amount 
which is alleged against him. Further contends that Panchayat was 
convened which ultimately came to the conclusion that only Rs.8000/- 
are outstanding towards the petitioner. Lastly, it is contended that 
maximum punishment for the offence provided in the statute is 03 
years, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the concession of bail on 
this score alone. 
4. 
 
On the other land, learned Law Officer along with the 
complainant, present in person, contends that he had sold one plot 
against the consideration of Rs.62,00,000/- and the rest of the amount 
was paid in cash in two installments. Contends that the complainant 
has been deprived of huge amount and as such the petitioner does not 
deserve any leniency.  
5. 
 
We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and 
gone through the record. 
 
 
As per the contents of the crime report, the allegation 
leveled against the petitioner is of depriving the complainant of huge 
amount under the garb of friendship. On the previous date of hearing, 
we had specifically asked the complainant about the mode of payment 
of the amount to the petitioner, upon which he sought time and the case 
was fixed for 23.09.2021. Today, during the course of proceedings, the 
complainant categorically stated that the amount paid to the petitioner 
was in fact in cash and the same was not paid in lieu of any agreement 
or receipt in this regard can be furnished. Apart from this, we are told 
that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last 05 months and the 
maximum punishment provided under the statute is 03 years. As the 
amount was paid in installments which is not satisfactorily disclosed 
by the complainant, therefore, we are hesitant to make any observation 
in this regard, hence leaving it to be decided by the Trial Court after 
recording of evidence. Liberty of a person is a precious right which 
cannot be taken away without exceptional foundations. The law is very 
liberal especially when it is salutary principle of law that the offences 
which do not fall within the prohibitory clause, the grant of bail is a rule 
while its refusal is mere an exception. By following the aforesaid 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.957 OF 2021 
-: 3 :- 
principle and taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances 
stated above, we are of the view that the petitioner has made out a 
case for the grant of post-arrest bail. Resultantly, this petition is 
converted into an appeal and allowed, the impugned order is set aside 
and the petitioner is granted post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing 
bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (rupees one million) with one 
surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
23rd of September, 2021 
Approved for reporting 
Waqas Naseer/*