IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

        Crl. Bail A. No.S-696 of 2020        

 

DATE OF

HEARING

 

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE.

 

                           1. For orders on O/objection at flag-A.

                            2. For hearing of bail application.

 

 

09.08.2021

 

Mr. Kashif Hussain Shaikh Advocate for applicant.

Mr. Muhammad Nasir associate of Mr. Muhammad Arif Malik Advocate for complainant.

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar Addl.P.G for state.

                   ***************

 

            O R D E R

 

 

 

 

          Through instant Crl. Bail application, applicant Irshad Ahmed son of Peer Bux Awan seeks pre-arrest bail in Crime No.211 of 2020 registered at Police Station, Daharki district, Ghotki u/s 489-F PPC. His earlier application for grant of pre-arrest bail bearing No.1301/20 was heard and dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ghotki vide order dated 07.11.2020 on remaining absent on three consecutive dates of hearing and before that his bail application bearing No.1481 of 2020 was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ghotki vide order dated 14.11.2020 for non-compliance of order of furnishing two solvent sureties each in the sum of Rs.35,00,000/- and PR bond in the like amount. The applicant was admitted to interim bail by this Court subject to furnishing of solvent surety in the sum of Rs.500,000/- and PR bond in the like amount vide order dated 19.11.2020, now he seeks confirmation of the same.

 

          At the very outset, learned Counsel for the complainant states that dispute between the parties with regard to payment of loan amount   is already subjudice in a Civil suit bearing No.133 of 2020 which is pending adjudication before Senior Civil Judge, Ubauro and since certain cheque was dishonoured, instant FIR was lodged. He further states that he has no objection for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail subject to raising the bail amount from Rs.500,000/- to Rs.70,00,000/- by the applicant.

          Learned Counsel for applicant while showing his willingness for furnishing additional surety of Rs.6500,000/- requests for the grant of  two weeks’ time for furnishing additional surety.

 

Accordingly, the interim bail granted to applicant vide order dated 19.11.2020 is hereby confirmed subject to his furnishing  additional surety of Rs.6500,000/- with fresh PR bond in the sum of Rs.70,00,000/- to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court. However, in case applicant fails to furnish additional surety as directed above within period of two weeks’ hereof, this Crl. Bail application shall stands dismissed by recalling interim order.

 

          Application stands disposed of.

 

                                                                                                          J U D G E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ihsan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

 

        Constt. Petition No.D-1630 of 2020

 

DATE OF

HEARING

 

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE.

 

1. For orders on CMA No.7374/20

2. For orders on O/objection at flag-A.

3. For orders on CMA No.7375/20

4. For hearing of main case.

5. For orders on CMA No.7376/20

 

 

 

 

05.01.2021

 

Mr. Amir Mustafa Kamario Advocate for petitioner.

                   ***************

 

 

1.       Granted.

2.       Deferred for the time being.

3.       Granted.

 

4&5   Through this petition, the petitioner has prayed as under;

 

a). That this Honourable Court may be pleased to declare the letter dated 09.06.2020 as null void, ab initio.

 

b). That this Honourable Court may be pleased to suspend the operation of impugned letter dated 09.06.2020 issued by the Food Department as per wish of  the NAB authorities illegal rate till disposal of this petition in hand.

 

c). That this Honourable Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to determine the liability  as the petitioner wants to enter into Plea Bargain (P.B) as per Issue Rate of Sindh Government i.e. 3450 Rupees/100 Bags instead of 4120.59/100 Bag as per NAB Ordinance, 1999.

 

d). To grant any other equitable relief deemed fit and proper in the light of above facts and circumstances.

 

 

 

          Since, the reference No.22 of 2020 has been filed against the petitioner which is pending adjudication before the Accountability Court at Sukkur which being competent has to decide the application as well as resolved the grievance of the petitioner therefore, in view of above instant petition seems to be immature and is not maintainable. Accordingly, instant petition is dismissed along with listed applications.

 

 

                                                                                                            J U D G E

 

                                                                                                J U D G E

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ihsan