IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail
Application No.947 of 2025
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
hearing of bail application
------------------------------------------
13.05.2025
Mr. Shafquat
Gul Malik, advocate for applicant
Ms. Seema Zaidi, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
SIP Nazir Ahmed of P.S. Itehad Town, Karachi
Complainant present
------------------------------------
SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI,
J.—Applicant Muhammad Shoaib son of Afzal Ahmed seeks
pre-arrest bail in FIR No.58/2025, registered
at P.S. Ittehad
Town, Karachi for offence under section 489-F, PPC, after rejection of his bail
plea by learned Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Karachi West vide order dated
05.03.2025.
2. Facts
of the case are that applicant issued two cheques of
Rs.1,200,000/- and Rs.710,000/-, drawn on United Bank Limited, to complainant,
in lieu of amounts borrowed by him on various pretexts from complainant, which
on presentation were dishonoured due to insufficiency
of funds, hence the subject FIR.
3. Learned
counsel for applicant submits that there is a delay of about five months in
lodging of FIR, without any plausible explanation; that alleged offence does
not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.PC; that he has given cheques
as guarantee and this issue can be resolved after recording evidence.
4. On the
other hand, learned Additional Prosecutor General Sindh, assisted by
complainant, has opposed the bail to the applicant on the ground that applicant
is nominated in FIR; that in order to cheat the complainant he issued two cheques of Rs.1,200,000/- and Rs.710,000/- in his favour, which were dishonoured on
presentation due to insufficiency of funds. She further submits that applicant
kept the complainant on false hopes for making payment, therefore, he did not
register the FIR and after his refusal for making payment he lodged the FIR.
5. Heard
learned counsel for applicant, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh, counsel for
complainant and perused the material available on record.
6. Admittedly,
two cheques issued by the complainant were presented
on 15.10.2024 and the same were dishonoured on
presentation due to insufficiency of funds. Per complainant, applicant kept him
on false hopes for making payment, therefore, there is delay in lodging the
FIR. Usually, in money transaction cases, delay occurs in lodging of FIR on the
hope of settlement between the parties. However, delay in such like cases is
not fatal to the prosecution case. No doubt, alleged offence does not fall
within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.PC
but it is also a well-settled principle of law that
pre-arrest bail cannot be granted in every case as each case has its own facts
and circumstances. The consideration of pre-arrest bail is altogether different
from that of post-arrest bail. The persons seeking bail are duty-bound to
establish and prove mala fide on the part of investigating agency or
complainant. The bail before arrest is meant to protect innocent citizens who
have been involved in heinous offence with mala intentions and ulterior
motives, which are lacking in the instant case. Reliance is placed on the cases
reported as 2020 SCMR 249 (Gulshan Ali Solangi versus State),
2022 SCMR 750 (Ghulam
Qadir versus State) 2020 SCMR 313 (Bilal Hussain
(deceased) versus President, National Bank of Pakistan) 2019 SCMR 1129 (Rana Abdul Khaliq vs. The State).
7. From
tentative assessment of material available on record, the applicant has failed
to make out a case for a grant of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, the instant
bail application is dismissed and
interim pre-arrest already granted to applicant vide order dated 15.04.2025 is
hereby recalled.
8. Needless
to mention here that observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and
the same would not prejudice the case of either party at trial.
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS