IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

Crl. Bail Application No.S-690 of 2023

 

 

Applicant:                                Abdul Rehman Mahar, through

Mr. Prem Kumar @ Parmanand, Advocate

 

 

Complainant:                           Sahib Khan, through

Mr. Muhammad Rafique Kalwar, Advocate

 

State:                                       Through Mr. Syed Sardar Ali Shah

Addl. Prosecutor General.

 

Date of hearing:                       24.11-2023

Date of Decision:                      24.11-2023

 

 

O R D E R

 

ZULFIQAR ALI SANGI, J.-            Post arrest bail was denied to the applicant in case FIR No.99/2023 dated 07.09.2023, registered at Police Station Khanpur Mahar, district Ghotki, for offence under Section    489-F, PPC by the Court of Judicial Magistrate/Consumer Protection Court, Ghotki vide order dated 18-09-2023, maintained by the Court of Additional Session Judge-III, Ghotki vide order dated 27-09-2023.

 2.      As per the FIR, applicant issued a Cheque No.1946644165, of MCB bank Khanpur Mahar in lieu of repayment of amount of the complainant for Rs.1390,000/- which on presentation was dis-honored. After investigation the case was challaned and bail applications filed by the applicant were dismissed as stated above. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that for an offence not falling within the prohibitory clause, the grant of bail is a rule and refusal is an exception. He relied upon the case of Sheikh Abdul Raheem v. The State and another (2021 SCMR 822). Counsel for the complainant and the Addl.PG opposes the bail plea on the ground that the applicant defrauded several persons and some other FIRs of same nature were also registered against him, therefore, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

3.       I have heard learned counsel for parties and have examined the record of the case. I am cognizant of the fact that the offence under Section 489-F, PPC does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) Cr.PC, and bail in such a matter is a rule and refusal is an exception. However, the Supreme Court in the case of Muhammad Imran Vs. The State (P L D 2021 Supreme Court 903) had formulated the grounds for the case to fall within the exceptions meriting denial of bail include (a) the likelihood of the applicant’s abscondence to escape trial; (b) his tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the prosecution witnesses to obstruct the course of justice; or (c) his repeating the offence keeping in view his previous criminal record or the desperate manner in which he has prima facie acted in the commission of offence as alleged. The prosecution has to show if the case of the applicant falls within any of these exceptions on the basis of the material on the record.

4.       Record shows that the applicant has been booked in two criminal cases under the same offence with different complainants and involving sizable amounts of money. These cases were registered during the year 2023. It is further observed during the arguments of the parties that some other FIR’s of same nature were also registered against the applicant and are admitted by the counsel for the applicant but he submits in some of those the applicant has been granted bail. However, counsel for the complainant place on record one FIR bearing crime No. 88/2023 registered at the same police station for offence u/s 489-f PPC, registered by Israr Ahmed Gadani. The material on record makes the case of the applicant fall under the exceptions to the rule of grant of bail as mentioned above. The applicant involved in two criminal cases registered against him for the same offence by different parties and one was even been registered after the instant case. Therefore, the factual matrix of the instant case is very different from the one cited by the learned counsel.

 5.      For the above reasons I am not inclined to interfere in the well-considered findings of the court below and dismissed the instant bail application. The applicant is behind bars and is entitled to the fair and speedy trial, therefore the trail court is hereby directed to conclude the trial within the period of three months’ from the date when order is received and furnish compliance report to this court through Additional Registrar.

6.       The bail application is disposed of as above.

                                                                                               J U D G E

Ihsan/*