The criminal case giving rise to this bail matter, was initially registered against one Abdur Rashid at the instance of the Controller of Military Accounts, Rawalpindi. The allegation was that he fraudulently withdrew money from the Government treasury on the strength of bogus cheque. It is stated that one of such cheques bearing No. D-768111 for a sum of Rs. 276752.37 was handed over to the petitioner by the Section Incharge to fill in the entries therein through the type-writer; he passed on the cheque to the principal accused as he is member of the gang which misappropriated the government money.
2. The petitioner in the first instance moved an application for pre---arrest bail which was refused.
Consequently lie was al rested on 9-9-1980 and after completion of the interrogation was sent to judicial lock-up. Bail after arrest was also declined to the petitioner by the learned Special Judge.
He has now approached this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is merely one of the typists employed in section concerned and had nothing to do with the cheque; no nexus has been found out between the petitioner and the other members of the gang so much so even his name was not mentioned in the F. I. R. The fact that the petitioner is in the judicial lock-up since 16-9-1980 and is no longer required by the investigation agency for. Interrogation purposes is another ground canvassed by the learned counsel in support of his submissions. It is also asserted that the case was registered about two years ago and the investigation is yet half way; there is no possibility of the accused being sent up for trial is the near future.
4. Bail has been opposed on behalf of the State on the ground that there is sufficient evidence of passing on the cheque to the petitioner by Incharge of the Section for filling in the entries therein; the special type-writer giving perforated impression is handled by the petitioner alone. It is also argued that the petitioner was the member of the gang, whose particulars were disclosed to the investigating agency during the investigation of the case.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the State who was assisted by the Investigation Officer, I have found that the only evidence mustered so far by the prosecution is the delivery of the blank cheque by the Section Incharge to the petitioner. The case is stated to be still under investiga--tion and it is yet to be seen as to whether or not the petitioner shared the ill-gotten money. On his part, he is denying to have participated in the commission of the offence at any stage. I feel that the facts present obtaining on the record amply demonstrate that this is a case for further inquiry into the guilt of the petitioner, which would entitle him to bail. Furthermore the investigation officer has stated that interrogation having already completed, the petitioner is not required by them.
6. For all these reasons, the petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes a bail bond in the sum of RS. 30,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge Central, Rawalpindi.