Faisal Malhi vs State S — 2025 YLR 2393 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Faisal Malhi VS State S.497---Prevention of Electronic Crimes act (XL of 2016), Ss.20, 21 & 24---Threats, harassment, and blackmailing---Bail, grant of---absence of independent witness in recovery proceedings---Case of further inquiry---Offence not falling within the prohibitory clause---The cell phone was not actually owned by the petitioner---Though the investigating officer had tried to establish that the sim was used in the cell phone recovered at the instance of the petitioner but it was noted from record that no independent witness was joined in recovery proceedings of said cell phone---No other evidence was available on record---Hence, the evidentiary value of the said recovery as well as involvement of the petitioner in the instant case was to be adjudged by the Trial Court seized with the power after recording evidence---Moreover, the entire evidence, collected by the FIa authorities was based upon documentary evidence, which was already in the possession of the prosecution and there was no likelihood of tampering with the same by the accused/petitioner---Moreover, as per settled law the bail did not mean acquittal of accused but only change of custody from Government agencies to the sureties, who on furnishing bonds took responsibility to produce the accused whenever and wherever required to be produced---Even otherwise the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner carried maximum punishment of five years and three years respectively, hence did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.497 Cr.P.C. and in such like cases bail was a rule and refusal was an exception---Petitioner had no previous criminal record---Petitioner was behind bars since his arrest---The investigation to the extent of present petitioner was completed and he was no more required to the police for further investigation as report under S.173 Cr.P.C. had been filed---No useful purpose could be served by keeping the petitioner behind bars for indefinite period---Subject to furnishing of bail bonds in sum of Rs.500,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Trial Court the petitioner was enlarged on bail---Petition was allowed, in circumstances.

Faisal Malhi vs State S — 2025 YLR 2393 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR