NASIM SIKANDAR, J.--- The petitioner was allowed ad interim pre-arrest bail on 26-6-2007 in case F.I.R. No.79 of 2006 dated 13-2-2006 under section 489-F registered at Police Station Gulberg, Lahore, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
2. The F.I.R. In question was recorded on the written application received from one Mian Maqsood Zulqarnain son of Ameer-ud-Din, Managing Partner of Feroza Cotton Factory, Rahim Yar Khan. In the application, the complainant alleged that he had supplied cotton to Messrs Aziz Spinning Mills of which the accused Khalid Aziz Khan was a Managing Director. It was claimed that in consideration thereof the accused/petitioner as well as Riaz Ahmed Butt, General Manager, Finance, Aziz Spinning Mills gave him three cheques of total value of Rs.2,84,096 drawn on Metropolitan Bank Limited, Gulberg Branch, Lahore. Further that he deposited these cheques in his account but the said banker of Aziz Spinning Mills declined to honour them on account of lack of sufficient funds.
3. Earlier on 7-9-2006 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore refused to confirm the pre- arrest bail granted to the petitioner.
4. No one for the complainant has turned up.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Deputy Prosecutor- General. I am inclined 'to confirm the ad interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner on 26-6- 2007 for the following reasons:--
(i) Admittedly, the petitioner issued cheques as Managing Director of Aziz Spinning Mills, which is stated to be non-listed public company. It is also an admitted fact A that the company has already been directed to be wounded up and a liquidator has been appointed by the Company Bench of this Court.
(ii) The petitioner is one of the 57 share-holders of the said limited company. The issue if liability of Chief Executive of the Company extends and overlape his liability as a share-holder needs further consideration. It may also be mentioned that the cheques in question were not issued from his personal account with the banker.
(iii) It is not disputed that the petitioner did, not incur any personal liability on supply of cotton nor he is the sole beneficiary of the supply made to the limited company. The factum of the company having gone into liquidation and a liquidator also having been appointed the nature of claim .Of the complainant as supplier as also the status of the accused as C.E.O. Of the Company has undergone a change. The legal implication, of such change also needs to be considered and ruled upon which will be possible only after production of evidence of the parties in the trial.
(iv) The petitioner is stated to be mote than 70 years of age. A number of documents, medical prescriptions, laboratories results have been placed on record to show that he is a heart patient besides suffering from other serious ailments.
(v) All documents relevant to the case in hand being not in possession of the accused, he is not required for their recovery. These documents are lying either with the banker of the petitioner- accused or the complainant. These can very well be collected by the Investigating Officer without arresting the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the ad interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner vide order, dated 26- 6-2007 is hereby confirmed. The bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 already submitted at the time of ad interim relief shall hold good.