1. ' FAROOQ ALI CHANNA , J.---The applicant Mehmood Khan through this bail application seeks his release on bail in F.I.R. No, 28 of 2013 under sections 462-B/462-C/462-E/109 P.P.C. Police Station FIA, Cyber Crime, Karachi lodged by Chief Manager, S&M, SSGCL, Head Office Karachi.
2. ' Briefly the facts of the case are that as per report, SSGCL Team conducted an inspection at Re- Rolling Factory, situated at Survey No, 481. Ibrahim Hyderi, Sector-47, Korangi Creek behind Pakistan Refinery Limited, Karachi and found, fake/unauthorized meters having Nos. 13337970 and 0501351 installed at the said factory and pipeline connected illegally with the main service line. The FIA authorities, on receipt of complaint, conducted inquiry. Per company record the above referred meters were not issued in favour of the Re-Rolling Factory and were installed without appropriate sanction. It is further alleged that before the raid conducted by a team comprising of FIX officials and SSGCL officials, the meters and pipelines laid down connecting the main pipeline were removed, however, some marks were visible at the place of installation. The above act of the accused was for the purpose of committing the theft of gas.
3. ' During investigation the Investigating Officer arrested the applicant and recovered the meters mentioned in the F.I.R. From his shop under seizure memo. The bail application moved earlier by the applicant was dismissed by the trial court.
4. ' Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that case is false and fabricated, the applicant is Contractor registered with SSGCL, however due to some differences with the higher officials of SSGCL they involved the applicant in this case mala fide, the co-accused Dr. Mir Mustafa, the owner of property has already been granted bail, that admittedly at the time of alleged raid the factory was not functional nor the owner was steeling the gas as such no offence punishable under section 462(B), (C) & (E) P.P.C. Is attracted. Learned counsel further contended that the sole evidence against the applicant is that fake/ unauthorized meters shown in the F.I.R. Were recovered from his shop, such recovery is doubtful, it appears from the contents of interim charge sheet prepared on 24-12-2013 that the applicant was arrested and recovery was effected from his shop on 26-12-2013 after two days of preparing the interim charge sheet.
5. ' Learned Standing Counsel has vehemently opposed the grant of bail and has contended that the applicant being Contractor with active connivance of some unscrupulous employees of SSGCL installed the fake/unauthorized-meters at Re-Rolling Factory and on detection of offence, they removed the said meters; which were recovered from the shop of applicant which is sufficient evidence to connect the applicant in commission of crime. He further contended that the applicant is facing trial under section 462-B/462-C/462-E/109-P.P.C. Punishable for more than ten years hence against the applicant falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497(i), Cr.P.C., therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
6. ' I have considered the arguments of learned counsel appearing for both the sides and perused the record.
7. As per contents of the F.I.R, at the time of alleged raid/ inspection conducted by joint team of FIA and SSGCL at Re-Rolling Factory no meter was found installed in factory premises, pipeline laid down and connected with the main pipeline was also not there. The F.I.R. Also does not reflect that any witnesshad seen the applicant taken away the meters.. So far the recovery of said meters is concerned, admittedly those were recovered from the shop and not from the physical possession of the applicant, moreover the contents of interim charge sheet prepared on 24-11-2013 create some doubt in the arrest of applicant and alleged recovery of meters which per prosecution effected on 26-12-2013 two days after the interim charge sheet was prepared. Mere severe punishment is not a ground to decline the bail to which the applicant otherwise is entitled on merits.
8. ' Accordingly, I admit the applicant on bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac only) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.