1. Through this petition under Section 497, Cr.P.C., petitioner Ajmal Javed has sought post arrest bail in case FIR No. 23 dated 28.06.2019, in respect of offences under Sections 420, 468, 471, 409 & 109 Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station, FIA/CBC, Multan.
2. The allegation against the petitioner is that in the year, 2017 he alongwith his co-accused, in 'connivance with the bank employees, got transferred pounds-56152, through two cheques in the respective bank accounts of Mst.
3. Shumaila Javed and Mst. Naila Javed on 20.01.2017 from the account of Muhammad Aslam, father of the complainant after two days of his death in Saudi Arabia on 18.01.2017. Hence, this case was registered.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner , learned Deputy Prosecutor General appearing for the State assisted by learned counsels for the complainant and perused the record with their able assistance.
5. The allegation against the petitioner was only to the extent that he, being father of principal accused namely, Shumaila Javed and Naila Javed in whose account the amount in issue was transferred, provided assistance to them. Co-accused Adnan Javed, a son of the A present petitioner, with identical role of providing assistance to the principal accused, has already been enlarged on post arrest bail by the learned Court below vide order dated 04.12.2019. The petitioner was presumed to have prepared and used the said cheques resulting into the transfer of amount in issue in the respective bank accounts of his daughters but the question remains that why did he not get transferred the same in his own account instead he got it transferred in the name of his married daughters. It has been admitted during the course of arguments that the amount in issue is still lying in the accounts of the aforesaid ladies and the allegation of beneficiary to the transaction against the present petitioner prima facie stands nowhere. The petitioner was arrested in this case on 26.11.2019 and during investigation no incriminating material was recovered from his possession. In this backdrop, the petitioner is also entitled to the relief sought for on the basis of rule of consistency.
6. In view of above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 500,000/- (rupees five lac) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.