Akmal Khan vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 163 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

Akmal Khan VS State Ss. 498 & 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 109---Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947), Ss. 5 & 23---Restriction on payments, restrictions on import and export of certain currency and bullion, abetment---Pre-arrest bail, confirmation of---Rule of consistency---Allegation against the applicant-accused was that he made transaction of foreign currency without any legal justification---Tentative assessment of the evidence showed that there was no direct evidence available on record to connect the applicant with the commission of alleged offence---Applicant was nominated in the FIR on the confessional statement of co-accused---Such confessional statement was not admissible under Art.38 & 39 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Confessional statement of an accused could not be used against the other in absence of any attending material produced by the prosecution---Contravention of S.5 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, entails total punishment as provided by S.23 of the said Act is imprisonment which may extend to five years or with fine or with both---Since the alternate sentence of fine had also been provided, therefore, the applicant was entitled to the concession of bail on that ground alone---Co-accused had already be enlarged on bail, thus the applicant was also entitled for bail on the ground that offence against accused fell outside the scope of prohibited clause contained in S.497, Cr.P.C, notwithstanding the fact that mandatory provision of law contained in the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, in respect of search and recovery had apparently not been complied with---If the bail of applicant was not confirmed, after arrest he could be allowed bail on the ground that similarly placed co-accused was already on bail---When bail application of co-accused having one and the same role was allowed, then applicant could also be given the benefit of such bail on the ground of consistency, even at the stage of bail before arrest---By sending applicant behind the bars, no useful purpose would be served---Petition was allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner was confirmed, in circumstances.

Akmal Khan vs State Ss — 2026 YLR 163 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR