ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No.1179 of 2023

(Jameel Ahmed vs. The State)

Date Order with signature of Judges

For hearing of bail application

12.06.2023

M/s Qamar Hussain & Saifullah Abbasi, advocates for the applicant

Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh

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

The facts in brief necessary for disposal of the instant criminal bail application are that one Mujahid Hussain being husband of the complainant Mst. Samra Bibi, allegedly invested certain amount with the applicant with fixed profit which he failed to pay and then on demand returned his money to him by issuing two cheques in his favour dishonestly, those were bounced when were presented before the concerned Bank for encashment, for that the present case was registered. On refusal of pre-arrest bail by learned XII Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi East, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under section 498-A Cr.P.C.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant on behalf of her husband; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of more than one month; offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within prohibitory clause and it carries punishment of imprisonment for three years or fine or both, if the applicant on trial is punished with fine only then the imprisonment which he is likely to undergo on his arrest would be somewhat extra, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide.

None has come forward to advance arguments on behalf of the complainant, however, learned Additional P.G. Sindh for the state has opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that he has committed financial death of the complainant party in a very deceitful manner.

Heard arguments and perused the record.

The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of more than one month; such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within the prohibitory clause. The complainant is pursuing the cause of her husband on the basis of power of attorney which is novel in criminal proceedings. The case has finally been challaned and there is no allegation of misusing the concession of interim pre-arrest bail on part of the applicant. In these circumstances, a case of grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant on point of further inquiry and malafide is made out.

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

Instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE