IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Bail Application No.S-253 of 2018

Applicant               :                Rawat Ali son of Rato Khan Abro

Through Mr.Irfan Ali Badar Abbasi, Advocate

State                    :                  Through Mr.Yasir Arafat, A.P.G.

Date of hearing   :                  05.10.2018

Date of order      :                  05.10.2018

O R D E R

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits, after receipt of Rs.16,00,000/- from complainant Mehrullah, issued fake appointment order in favour of his brother Habib Rehman, as Junior Clerk, in Anti-Corruption department and then threatened the complainant to be killed in case he would ask for return of his money, for that the present case was registered.

2.                On having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned incharge Sessions Judge, Kashmore @ Kandhkot, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s.498 Cr.PC.

3.                It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that he being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant part, there is delay of about 17 days in lodgment of the FIR, the proceedings of the very case has been stopped by learned trial Magistrate. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicant as according to him he is apprehending his unjustified arrest.

4.                Learned A.P.G has opposed to grant of bail to the applicant by contending that the offence is affecting the society at large.

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

6.                The FIR has been lodged with delay of about 17 days; such delay could not be lost sight of. The appointments in public service are to be made on merits in accordance with the set procedure. If the complainant sought for appointment of his brother in public service other than merit by making payment to someone else illegally, then he will have to suffer for his own misdeed. The offence is not falling within the prohibitory clause. The proceeding of the very case has been stopped by learned trial Court u/s.249 Cr.PC. In that situation, it is rightly being contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of malafide.

7.                In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

8.                The instant application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                                             JUDGE