' SH. AHMAD FAROOQ, J.---The instant post arrest bail petition has been filed on behalf of Muhammad Amin, who is behind the bars, in a case arising out of F.I.R. No,424 of 2010, dated 3-7- 2010, registered in Police Station Gulshan-e-Ravi, Lahore, under sections 406/408 P.P.C.
2. Briefly, the prosecution story as narrated by the complainant in the F.I.R., is that he deals in the business of screens and doors of the vehicles and has set up an office at his residence. The complainant contended that he purchased a shop in Faisalabad and employed the accused/ present petitioner as a salesman at a salary of Rs.15,000 per month, to manage/supervise his business. The complainant alleged that on rendition of the accounts, it transpired that during the period from 10th May, 2007 to 23rd February, 2010, the accused had misappropriated Rs.20,28,728 in hard cash and took away the goods/stocks worth Rs.21,21,500. The complainant further alleged that the accused dishonestly misappropriated the money and has committed a breach of trust.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is an inordinate delay in the registration of the case as the occurrence took place during the period starting from 10-5-2007 to 23-2-2010, whereas, the F.I.R. Was lodged on 3-7-2010. He further submitted that the petitioner and the complainant are business partners and in this connection, the petitioner has filed a suit for declaration, rendition of account and recovery against the complainant. He maintained that the recovery of Rs.75,000 has been planted upon the petitioner. He contended that the Police Station Gulshan-e-Ravi, Lahore has no territorial jurisdiction to register the instant F.I.R. Against the present petitioner as the parties were carrying on their business at Faisalabad.
4. Conversely, the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned Deputy Prosecutor- General opposed the instant bail petition on the plea that the petitioner has misappropriated a huge amount of the complainant and he is guilty of criminal breach of trust. They further submitted that an amount of Rs.75,000 has been recovered from the present petitioner, which by no means could be considered as having been planted. They submitted that the suit for rendition of account was filed by the present petitioner after the registration of the instant case in order to avoid criminal liability.
' Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. From the contents of the F.I.R., is revealed that the present petitioner was working as a Manager at the shop of the complainant on a monthly salary of Rs.15,000 and there is an allegation against him of misappropriating hard cash of Rs.20,28,728 and goods/stocks worth Rs.21,21,500. During the course of investigation, an amount of Rs.75,000 along with few vouchers was got recovered on behalf of the present petitioner by one Rana Abdul Sattar, who is his close relative, which, prima facie, connects the present petitioner with the commission of the alleged offence. The recovery of a huge amount of Rs.75,000 cannot possibly be planted by the police on the complainant. As far as the suit for declaration, rendition of account and recovery, filed by the present petitioner, is concerned, admittedly, the same was filed after the registration of the instant case. Even otherwise, civil and criminal proceedings could proceed simultaneously. The petitioner was arrested only about two months earlier, i,e, 13th July, 2010 and there is a serious allegation of misappropriation of a huge amount of the complainant. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail.
Resultantly, the instant post-arrest bail petition, filed on behalf of Muhammad Amin, is dismissed.