Tariq Mahmood petitioner/accused in case FIR No. 1629/2011, dated 11.2.2011. under Sections 420/468/471, PPC, Police Station Sargodha Road, Faisalabad seeks post-arrest bail through this petition
2. As pet FIR lodged on 11.12.20D , on the application of Muhammad Ishfaq complainant, the allegation against the petitioner is that he being a property dealer introduced one Muhammad Faisal son of Muhammad Yasin as Rehan Mahmood owner of a property bearing No. 476, Block-F, Gulistan Colony Faisalabad, that complainant agreed to purchase the said property for a total consideration of Rs, 13,00,000/- and paid Rs.5,00,000/- to them as earnest money; that in this regard an agreement dated 5365 dated 05.7.2011 was also executed between them that when he asked them to receive the remaining amount and transfer the said property in their favour, they lingered on the matter and thereafter it came to his knowledge that they have played fraud upon him
3. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case with, malice; that neither the petitioner is beneficiary nor executant or witness of the alleged forged document; that FIR is lodged with inordinate delay of more than five months without assigning any sufficient reason; that the offences do not fall within prohibitory clause; that investigation has been completed and petitioner is no more required by the police for further investigation; that the petitioner is behind the bars since 11.12.2011 without any progress in the trial.
4. It is resisted by learned DDPP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant with the arguments that he is nominated in the FIR with particular role; that trial is in progress at the stage of prosecution evidence that prima facie prosecution has sufficient incriminating material against the petitioner to connect him with the commission of alleged crime, therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of bail.
5. I have given patient hearing to learned counsel for the parties lea learned DDPP for the State and gone through the record.
6. As per contents of FIR, the occurrence allegedly took place on 5 7.2.2011 whereas the matter was reported to the police on 11.12.2011 with delay of more than five months. No sufficient reason is assigned for such delay, therefore, chances of false implication with consultation and deliberation cannot be ruled out. The role attributed to the present Petitioner is at par with Mian Rashid co- accused, who has been allowed post-arrest bail by the learned Magistrate 1st Class Faisalabad vide order dated 26.12.2011 on the basis of exculpatory statement of the complainant that he has satisfied by the said co-accused. Admittedly the deal was struck between the complainant and co-accused Muhammad Faisal. The petitioner is neither executant or witness of the alleged forged agreement nor beneficiary of the same, The offences under Sections 420/468/471, PPC do not fall within prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. In the attending circumstances, it is a case of further inquiry. The investigation has been completed and petitioner is no more required by the police for further investigation. He is behind the bars since 11.12.2011 without any progress in the trial.
In such state of affairs his further incarceration would not serve any cause of justice.
7. For the above discussion and reasons, instant petition is accepted and petitioner is allowed post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.