ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Criminal Misc. Application No. S-345 of
2021
DATE OF HEARING |
ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF
HONOURABLE JUDGE |
13.09.2021
Mr. Ghulam Mujtaba Sahito, advocate for
applicant.
ZAFAR
AHMED RAJPUT,
J.- Through the instant Criminal Misc.
Application under sub-section (5) of section 497, Cr.P.C., applicant/complainant
Aneel s/o Suleman seeks cancellation of pre-arrest bail granted to respondent
No.2 /accused, namely, Sajjad Ali s/o Ghulam Rasool Channa by the Court of Sessions
Judge, Naushehro Feroze, vide order dated 18.03.2021 passed in ABA No.331 of 2021,
arisen out of Crime No.34 of 2021, registered at Police Station Naushehro
Feroze, under Section 489-F, P.P.C.
2. Briefly
stated facts of the case are that on 09.03.2021, applicant herein lodged the
aforementioned F.I.R. alleging therein that he is a goldsmith and during
2018-2019, respondent No.2 obtained Rs. 36,40,000/- for doing business of
motorcycles, later he came to know that the respondent No.2 was deceiving him;
hence, he stopped the business and demanded his amount. Respondent No.2 issued
a cheque, dated 05.02.2021 of MCB NBP, Naushehro Feroze
Branch, amounting to Rs. 36,40,000/-, which was dishonoured on
presentation.
3. Learned
Counsel for the applicant has mainly contended that that there are reasonable
grounds to believe that the respondent No.2 has committed the offence, as
alleged in the F.I.R. and the P.Ws have fully supported the case against the
respondent No.2, but the learned trial Court without considering the evidence
collected by the I.O during the course of investigation has granted pre-arrest bail
to him, hence,his bail is liable to be cancelled.
4. Heard
the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on
record.
5. The principles governing the grant of bail and the cancellation of bail substantially
stand on different footings and there is no compulsion for cancelling the bail unless
the bail granted order is patently illegal, erroneous, factually incorrect and
has resulted in miscarriage of justice or where accused is found to be misusing
the concession of bail by extending threats or tempering with the prosecution
case. Courts have always been slow to cancel bail already granted, asthe
liberty of a person cannot be curtailed on flimsy grounds. The grounds for
cancellation of bail are pari materia with the principles which apply to
setting aside the order of acquittal. Once bail is granted by a Court of
competent jurisdiction, then strong and exceptional grounds would be required
for cancellation thereof.
6. In
the instant case,it appears that the respondent No.2 was admitted to interim
pre-arrest bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Naushehro Feroze, vide order
dated 11.03.2021and thereafter, interim pre-arrest bail was confirmed by the
said Court, vide order dated 18.03.2021, and since then the respondent No.2 is on
bail. However, the complainant has not
asserted in her application if he has misused the concession of bail. The only ground raised in this application
for the cancellation of bail is that there was sufficient evidence against the
respondent No.2, but the learned Sessions Court admitted him to pre-arrest
bail. In this regard, it may be observed that the offence under section 489-F,
P.P.C. is a non-bailable offence; however, being punishable with imprisonment which
may extend to three years, it does not fall within the prohibitory clause of
section 497, Cr.P.C. This well-settled law that in such like cases rule is bail
and not jail.
7. For the
foregoing reasons, no occasion has been found by this Court for interfering
with the lawful exercising of the jurisdiction in the matter of bail by the
learned Sessions Judge, Naushehro Feroze. Under the circumstances, instant Criminal
Misc. Application is dismissed in limini being devoid of merit, along with
pending applications.
JUDGE