IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-468 of 2016

Applicants               :              1). Dr.Saifullah s/o Abdul Qadir Abbasi

2). Muhammad Ishaq s/o Rehmat Khan  

Through Mr.Inayatullah Morio, Advocate

State                    :                  Through Mr.Raja Imtiaz Ali Solangi, A.P.G.

Date of hearing   :                  12.09.2018

Date of order      :                  12.09.2018

O R D E R

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicants in furtherance of their common intention, misappropriated an amount of Rs.4,95,59,440/- against the fake bills for installation of Air-conditioned Units/Plants at Shaikh Zaid Women Hospital Larkana, for that the present case was registered.

2.                On having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption (Provincial), Larkana, the applicants have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 498 Cr.PC.

3.                It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that they being innocent have been involved in this case falsely at the instance of political elites of the city, there is delay of about one year in lodging of the FIR, the work has already been done,  the payment was made on recommendation of the committee, the work was done under proper documentation, the offence is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC and the case has finally been challaned. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicants as they according to him are apprehending their unjustified arrest at the hands of police. In support of his contention, he relied upon cases of Muhammad Ali vs. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Cabinet and others (2016 P.Cr.LJ-1498), and         2). Abdul Qasim vs. the State (SBLR 2016 Sindh-1377).

4.                Learned A.P.G for the State has opposed to grant of bail to the applicants by contending that they have misappropriated the public money against the fake bills.

5.                I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

6.                Admittedly, the FIR has been lodged with considerable delay and such delay in lodgment of the FIR could not be lost sight of. The entire documentary evidence has already been collected and challan of the case has been submitted by the police before the Court having jurisdiction, as such there is no apprehension of tampering with the record or evidence. The payment as per applicants was made on the basis of recommendation of the committee against the work done. The offence is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC and there appears no exceptional ground to justify withholding the concession of bail to the applicant. The applicants have not misused the concession of interim pre-arrest bail. In these circumstances, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicants that they are entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of malafide.

7.                In view of above and while relying the case law which is referred by learned counsel for the applicants, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

8.                The instant application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                             JUDGE

-