IN THE HIGH
COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No. 72 of 2018
Muhammad Wasib
...
..Applicant
Versus
The
State
.
..
.Respondent
Date
of Hearing & Short Order : 10.09.2018
Mr.
Muhammad Arif Shaikh, advocate
for applicant
Mr.
Malik Sadaqat Khan, Special Prosecutor SSGC
Mr.
Ghulam Shabbir Baloch, Assistant Attorney General
O R D E R
Fahim
Ahmed Siddiqui, J:
The
applicant Muhammad Wasib is in attendance after
getting interim pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 67/2017 under Section 15, 17, 24 of
Gas Theft Control & Recovery Act, 2016 lodged at PS SSGC Karachi.
Previously, his bail before arrest was declined by the Sessions Judge, Karachi East
as such he filed the instant anticipatory bail. Nevertheless, after initial
hearing he succeeded in getting ad-interim pre-arrest bail, which was granted
without touching merits and now it is fixed before me for confirmation or
otherwise.
2.
I
have heard the arguments advanced from either side and perused record produced
before me. After getting enlightened from the valued submissions made at bar
and scanning the record, I have observed as under:
(a)
The
allegations against the applicant are that he was found running a generator of
24 kVA after getting illegal connection from SSGC service line in his
embroidery factory, which is situated at Plot No. K-456, K-5 Area.
(b)
Although it is claimed that the applicant is running a
factory of embroidery but no material is collected in respect of his ownership
regarding the plot in question or the factory functioning therein.
(c)
A specific defence plea is taken that the plot in
question is owned by the father of applicant and he rented out the premises to
one Zaheer Ahmed and the factory functioning in the
said plot is owned by the tenant, against whom a rent case was filed by his
father being RC No. 79/2018 before learned Rent Controller-IV, Karachi East.
(d)
After considering the defence plea in juxtaposition to
the allegations levelled against the applicant, at least a case of further
probe has been made out.
(e)
The applicants have already joined trial and there is
no likelihood of his becoming absconder or fugitive to law/trial
(f)
The raiding party has collected all the material
evidence, in the existing position of affairs there will be no use to keep
applicant in jail.
3.
In view of the above discussion, it is my considered opinion
that a case of bail has been made out as such the earlier order of granting ad
interim relief of pre-arrest bail is hereby confirmed on the same terms and
condition.
4.
In the instant case, the matter has already been decided
through a short order and the above are the reasons for the same.
J
U D G E