ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Cr. B. A. No. 1202 of 2022

(Mst. Nasreen Mai vs. The State)

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

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE(s)

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

For hearing of bail application

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

05.08.2022

Mr. Qadir Hussain Khan, advocate for the applicant

Mr. Talib Ali Ali Memon A.P.G for the State

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

Irshad Ali Shah J.—It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits in furtherance of their common intention obtained the loan from Khushal Micro Finance Bank by pledging duplicate/fake/artificial gold and also executed cheques in favour of the said Bank to be encashed in case of default in repayment of loan, those were bounced when were presented before concerned Bank for encashment, for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicant, on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned VIII-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi East, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under section 498 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; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about four months and co-accused Muhammad Aamir has already been admitted to post arrest bail by learned trial Magistrate, therefore, the applicant being lady is entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on the point of further inquiry, consistency and malafide.

4. None has come forward to advance arguments on behalf of the complainant. However, learned A.P.G for the State has opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that the principles for grant of post and pre-arrest bail are different.

5. Heard arguments and perused the record.

6. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about four months, yet it does not contain the name of the applicant; the offence alleged against the applicant, the applicant being lady is entitled to relief provided under proviso (ii) to Section 497 Cr.P.C, even otherwise, the offence is not falling within prohibitory clause; the case has finally been challaned; the applicant has joined the trial and there is no allegation of misusing the concession of bail on her part and more so, co-accused Muhammad Aamir has already been admitted to post arrest bail by learned trial Magistrate, in that situation no useful purpose would be served, if applicant is taken into custody and then to admit her to bail on point of consistency.

7. In case of Muhammad Ramzan vs. Zafarullah and another (1986 SCMR-1380), it has been observed by the Honourable Apex Court that;

“no useful purpose was likely to be served if bail of accused(respondent) was cancelled on any technical ground because after arrest he could again be allowed bail on the ground that similarly placed other accused were already on bail”.

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

9. The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

J U D G E