ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr. B. A. No. 880 of 2022

(Muhammad Irshad vs. The State)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE(s)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For hearing of bail application

------------------------------

21.07.2022

Mr. Aamir Nawaz Warraich, advocate for the applicant

Syed Meeral Shah Bukhari Addl. P.G for the State

-------------------------------------------

Irshad Ali Shah J.— It is alleged that the applicant issued cheque in favour of complainant Muhammad Adil dishonestly, it was bounced by the concerned Bank when was presented there for encashment, for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicant on having been refused post arrest bail by learned Judicial Magistrate-XI Karachi West and 1^st Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi West has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant 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 business dispute with him; the F.I.R of the incident has been lodged with delay of about 23 days; civil litigation between the parties is going on and offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail on point of further enquiry. In support of his contentions, he relied upon case of Jehanzeb Khan Vs. The State through A.G Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and others (2020 SCMR-1268).

4. None has come forward to advance arguments on behalf of the complainant. However, learned Addl.P.G. for the State has opposed to release of the applicant on bail by contending that he has committed financial death of the complainant.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. The FIR of the incident been lodged with delay of about 23 days; such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The civil litigation between the parties is going on before the Civil Court having jurisdiction. The offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within prohibitory clause. 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 the point of further inquiry obviously is made out.

7. In view of above, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) 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.

J U D G E