The petitioner seeks confirmation of pre-arrest bail granted to him vide order dated 10.8.2010 in F.I.R.
No, 402 dated 2.7.2010 under Sections 379 P.P.C. registered at Police Station Saddar Bhakkar.
2. Briefly according to the F.I.R. the allegation against the petitioner is that he along with co- accused committed theft of cheque etc.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the occurrence is of 10.6.2010 while the FIR has .been registered with an unexplained delay of more than 22 days on 2.7.2010. It is further submitted that the prosecution as narrated in the FIR is totally false and concocted one; that the co-accused Nazakat Ali had business dealings with the complainant and on account of the supply of 450 bags of wheat and 105 bags of Channa the instant case has been got registered with mala fide intention on the part of the complainant. It is also contended that the cheque in dispute had been issued on 11.6.2010 and it was issued in the name of the co-accused Nazakat Ali, the same was presented on 25.6.2010 for payment and it was dishonoured on 29.6.2010; that the offence with which the petitioner has been charged, does not fall within the prohibitory clause. It is further stated that the co-accused Nazakat Ali had also filed a petition under Sections 22-A, 22B, Cr.P.C. before the Ex- Officio Justice of Peace/learned Addl. Sessions Judge for registration of a criminal case against the complainant.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. It is contended that no mala fide has been urged on behalf of the complainant; that twice the pre-arrest bail application of the petitioner has been dismissed for non-prosecution, Pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary concessional relief. The petitioner has been found guilty during the investigation. It is, further contended that Sections 420, 468 and 471 PPC have been added.
5. Arguments heard record perused.
6. Admittedly as per the allegations in the FIR to the extent of the petitioner, he is only alleged to have stolen the cheque of the complainant; which has not been recovered from the petitioner but the same has been recovered from the co-accused Nazakat Ali. Prima facie, there appears to be some business dispute between the complainant and the co-accused Nazakat Ali, as such, the case to the extent of the petitioner becomes doubtful, the benefit of the same goes to the petitioner. In the circumstances, the false and mala fide involvement of the petitioner also cannot be ruled out.
7. In view of the above, this petition is allowed. Ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide order dated 10.8.2010 is hereby confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bond in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.