ALI BAQAR NAJAFI, J. - The petitioner, through this petition, seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 03, dated 15.06.2013 under sections 33(5), (7), (12), (13), read with Section 2(37) of Sales Tax Act, 1990, registered at Police] Station, Inland Revenue, Regional Tax Office, Faisalabad.
2 As per FIR, allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons have violated the provisions of Sections 2(5-AB), 3, 6, 11, 14, 22, 23 & 26 of the Sales Tax Act, 1990 read with S.R.O. No. 555(1 )/2006, dated 05.06.2006 and wilfully and deliberately evaded tax amounting to Rs.
115.353 million along with default surcharge (to be calculated) which is recoverable from them.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the liability of the petitioner cannot be finally fixed without adjudication; that no show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner; that the petitioner is willing to pay l/4th of his liability. Places reliance upon the order dated 28.06.2013 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl. Misc. No. 7251-B of 2013 titled "Muhammad Zubair v. The State", whereby bail was granted subject to payment of 25% of his liability and for the remaining liability he has issued post dated cheques in favour of the Commissioner Inland Revenue under protest as he clan clear only after he bailed out.
3. Conversely, learned Special Prosecutor representing the State submits that if liability of the petitioner is cleared off to his extent he has no objection to grant him bail but he will have to pay l/4th of the amount in cash and the remaining 3/4th post dated cheques can be issued in the name of the Commissioner Inland.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the available record.
5. The petitioner was arrested on 16.06.2013 and nothing has been recovered from his possession.
He is no more required for investigation purpose. He appears to be a first offender. The offences in which the petitioner is; charged do not fall within the prohibitory clause of suction 497, Cr.P.C. As the petitioner has deposited Rs. 50,00,000/- cash and pay order of Rs. 56 lac today which has been handed over to the Investigating Officer and for the remaining liability he is willing to issue post dated cheques in favour of the Commissioner Inland Revenue under protest, therefore, further detention of the petitioner in jail would not serve any useful purpose. He undertakes to make an arrangement to pay his remaining liability which is possible only after he is released on bail.
Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. It is clarified that if at any stage the liability of the petitioner is found more than the one already admitted by him, the department may proceed for the recovery of the said amount arid in case it is found less then the department shall refund the excessive amount to the petitioner. It is also made clear that this arrangement shall not effect the trial of the petitioner and the matter shall be decided in accordance with law without being influenced by observations made by this Court.