ORDER
SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail Application No.231
of 2023
(Ansar
Farooq vs. The State)
Date Order with signature of Judges
For
hearing of bail application
14.06.2023
Mr. Nasir Ahmed, advocate a/w applicant
Ms. Rubina Qadir, D.P.G.
Complainant Muhammad Saeed in
person
-----------------------------------
It is alleged that the
applicant purchased the truck from the complainant and made payment whereof by
issuing a cheque dishonestly, it was bounced when was presented before the
concerned Bank for encashment, for that the present case was registered. On
refusal of pre-arrest bail by learned XI-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi
South, the applicant has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant
bail application u/s 498-A Cr.P.C.
It is contended by learned
counsel for the applicant being and old and infirm person has been involved in
this case falsely by the complainant in order to satisfy with him his dispute
over settlement of account; the FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay
of about 17 months; the 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 on refusal of
pre-arrest bail would be somewhat extra, therefore, the applicant is entitled
to be admitted to pre-arrest bail on point of further inquiry and malafide. In
support of his contention he relied upon the case of Bashir Ahmed versus The State and another (2023 SCMR 748).
Learned D.P.G. for the State
and complainant in person have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the
applicant by contending that he has committed financial death of the
complainant.
Heard arguments and
perused the record.
The FIR of the incident
has been lodged with delay of about seventeen months; 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 case has
finally been challaned and there is no allegation of misusing the concession of
interim pre-arrest bail on the part of 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.
J
U D G E