ORDER-SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No.  S- 377 of 2013.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

04.10.2013.

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For hearing.

Mr. Naushad Ali Tagar, Advocate for applicant.

Mr. Ameer Ahmed Narejo, State Counsel.

~~~~

Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J:     The applicant/accused Abdul Karim Tagar seeks post arrest bail in Crime No.31/2013 of P.S Mahota, registered under Sections 468, 471, 472, 473, 161, 34 P.P.C, read with Section 5 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act-II of 1947.

2.         As per F.I.R the allegation against the present applicant/accused is that he with rest of accused in collusion with each other were found involved in preparing fake appointment orders and service books etc. against payments, for that the present applicant/accused has been booked in the present case.

3.         I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned State Counsel and have gone through the police papers with able assistance of the parties counsel.

4.         No doubt, the name of applicant is appearing in the F.I.R but from perusal of F.I.R it shows that the name of present applicant has been included in the F.I.R at the statement of co-accused Mukhtiar Ahmed. Nothing has been recovered from possession of present applicant. Challan has already been submitted. The applicant is no more required to police for further investigation. All the alleged forged documents are in the custody of prosecution; therefore, there appears no question of tampering with prosecution evidence by the accused. The offences under Sections 468, 471, 161 P.P.C are bailable, where rest of the Sections applied in the F.I.R and challan sheet do not fall within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Learned State Counsel under these circumstances has recorded no objection, if the applicant is released on bail. Accordingly, in view of the above circumstances and no objection extended by learned State counsel, the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (One hundred thousand) and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

Judge