ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-592 of 2021.

_____________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

______________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

10.02.2022

                        M/S. Mehmood-ul-Hassan and Muhammad Hashim Soomro,

Advocates for the applicant.

Mr. Abdul Sattar Hulio, Advocate for the complainant.

Mr. Abdul Ghaffar Kalhoro, A.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged that the applicant issued a cheque dishonestly in favour of the complainant worth rupees Twenty Five Crores;    it was dishonoured by the concerned Bank, when was presented there for encashment for the reason that his Account is closed, for that the present case was registered.

2.         The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned             5^th Judicial Magistrate, Larkana and 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application u/s.497 Cr.PC.

3.         It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant in order to satisfy his dispute with him over the sale and purchase of the landed property; the cheque actually was stolen and then was misused by the complainant; the civil dispute between the parties is pending and the offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC. By contending so, they sought for release of the applicant on bail on point of further enquiry. In support of their contentions, they relied upon case of Jehanzeb Khan Vs. The State through A.G Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and others (2020 SCMR-1268).

4.         Learned A.P.G. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that the applicant has committed financial death of the complainant by depriving him of his valuable property and money.

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

6.         The FIR of the incident been lodged with delay of about four months; such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked.  The parties admittedly are disputed over sale and purchase of the landed property. The civil dispute between the parties is said to be pending. The offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC. The case has been challaned finally and there is no apprehension of tampering with the evidence on the part of applicant. In these circumstances, a case for release of the applicant on bail on point of further enquiry is made out obviously.

7.         In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum Rs.500,000/- and PR bond in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

8.         The instant criminal bail application is disposed of accordingly.

                                                                             JUDGE