LAHORE: The Lahore High Court (LHC) confirmed on Friday the pre-arrest bail of a doctor, who has been accused by his estranged wife of illegally selling her vehicle.
Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa passed the order, allowing a petition filed by Dr Umair Riaz, who sought confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the A-Division police station, Okara, under sections 406, 420, 468 and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC).
According to the prosecution, the complainant alleged that during the subsistence of her marriage, her vehicle remained in the use and possession of the petitioner as an entrusted property (amanat).
She accused him of committing criminal breach of trust by selling the vehicle and further alleged that forged documents were used in the transaction.
However, the judge found that the same vehicle had already been made the subject of a family suit instituted by the complainant, nearly a year before the registration of the criminal case.
In the family suit, the woman sought recovery of dowry articles and specifically claimed that her parents had provided Rs800,000 for the purchase of the vehicle, which was bought by the petitioner on her behalf and registered in her name.
Justice Bajwa observed that there was no room for doubt that the vehicle mentioned in the family suit was the same which formed the basis of the criminal proceedings.
The judge noted a significant inconsistency between the complainant’s stance in the family suit and the allegations levelled in the FIR.
The judge also noted that despite the pendency of the family litigation concerning the same vehicle and other dowry articles, the complainant failed to disclose the existence of those proceedings in the FIR.
The judge observed that this omission assumed significance in the peculiar facts of the case.
Justice Bajwa further observed that mere use of the expression “amanat” in an FIR is not sufficient to attract the offence of criminal breach of trust under Section 406 of the PPC, unless all essential ingredients of the offence are independently established.
The judge noted that the overall tenor of the record indicated that the dispute appeared to have arisen from strained matrimonial relations between the parties.
At this stage, the possibility of false implication of the petitioner due to the ongoing family dispute could not be ruled out altogether, the judge added.
Published in Dawn, June 6th, 2026