JUDGMENT SHEET

IS LAMA BAD HI GHC OU

IS D

Qrl. Miq.c. Nq. 836-8/4.91l

Javed-ur-Rehman
Vs.
The State etc.

Petitioner by:
State by:

_Cgmplainant in person.
Date of decision: 21-06-2011

Riaz Ahmad Khan J: Joved-ur-Rehmon

seeks post o'est
boil in cose FIR No. 11 l2OOg, doted Ol _04_2OO g, l)ls 7 ,g,g,l S,1g,2O

of The Prevention of Erectronic crimes ordinonc

e, 2oo7 reod
with section 36, 37 of Erectronic Tronsoctions
ordinonce, 2002,
Police stotion F.r.A. cyber crime circre,
Roworpindi.

2. Brief focts os per F.r.R. ore thot the

comproinont Jonos
Khon received on emoir messoge sent
by one Honson Torence,
through which he wos informed thot he
hod won rottery
omounting to r.3 Miilion US Doilors. The comproinont wos osked
by o group on the bosis of o foke retter
to poy 7.s% of the totor
omount of rottery. The comproinont occordingry
tronsfe,ed on
omount of Rs.r,g3,ooo/- into the nome of
Miss Moryom Foqir,
holder of on occount in GRES Bonk rsromobod,
then tronsferred
onother omount of Rs.r,3gg,125/- in the bonk occount
mointoined by the petitioner Joved-ur-Rehmon
in Foysor Bonk,
Brue Areo Bronch, rsromobod, ogoin poid in
cosh uS $ 20,000 to
one Jon Cosmos, ogoin sent gr 5.2g uK pounds
to one Honson
 Cfl. Misc. No. 036-Ft.201.1 2

Terrence, UK through western Union, then sent

on omount of
2700 US Dollors to Honson Terrence, UK through
western Union.
on receiving the comproint, enquiry wos conducted ond it
tronspired thot occount of Miss Moryom Foriq wos being
operoted by Joved-ur-Rehmon ond she did not know
onything
obout ony tronsoctions mode in her occount. Joved-ur-
Rehmon got signed bronk cheques from Miss Moryom
Foqir for
the operotion of her occount. As o resurt, F.r.R. wos registered.

3. Leorned counser for the petitioner contended thot the

cose hos been registered with molqfide intention, os the

petitioner hos not committed the offence in
which he hos
been chorged. Leorned counser for the petitioner further
contended thot the cose of the petitioner is one of further

enquiry ond the pelitioner is entifled to the concession of boil.

4. on the other hond, reorned stonding counser ossisted by

Assistont Director (Legol), FIA contended thqt the
comploinont
hos been defrouded ond huge omount wos emb
ezred by the
petitioner.

5 I hove heord leorned counser for the porties ond

hove olso perused the record.

6. ln the present cose, even if the ollegotions teveled

in

the F.l.R. ore odmitted to be correct, no cose under

Prevention of Electronic crimes ordinonc e, 2oo7 or
Electronic
Tronsoctions ordinonce, 2oo2 is mode out. The
only ollegotion
ogoinst the petitioner is thot on emoil messoge wos
sent to the
 Grf ..Misc-. ,No. ?86-F/201 1 3

comploinont ond then on ogreement between

comproinont
ond lwo other occused wos executed. Even if this
oilegotion is

occepted, it wourd not meon thot the petitioner hod

mode
illegol excess to documents, record, or hod destroyed
the
informotion system of ony service provider. rnfoct, the
olleged offence is not reloting to telecommunicotion lows.

on the foce of it, it con be soid thot this is o cose of simple

froud ond misrepresentotion. The occused hos not been

chorged under relevont sections of lows. Even under the

olleged sections of lows, the whole omount wos not sent

to the petitioner ond the ollegotion thot the omount wos

octuolly sent under misconception wourd require

evidence, os such, the cose of the petitioner is one of

further enquiry. ln the circumstonces, this boil petition

is

occepted. The petitioner be releosed on boil subject to his

furnishing boil bonds in the sum of Rs.l ,OO,OOO/- with two

locol sureties in the like omount to the sotisfoction of

leorned triol Court.

(R|AZ AHMAD KHAN)

JUDGE

W"1il

Uploaded By : Engr. Umer Rasheed Dar

,,1,['.
^

$r