Through this petition under Section 498, Cr.P.C. the petitioner , namely , Aman Ullah, seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 189 of 2019 dated 3.7.2019, registered at police station City Taunsa Shari f, District DG Khan, in respect of an of fence under Section 489-F , PPC.
2. The allegation as against the petitioner , culled from the evidentiary material produce before the Court, is that the petitioner had allegedly drawn three cheques of total value of Rs.30,00,000/- and issued the same to the complainant which, on presentation before the concerned bank authorities, were dishonoured.
3. I have heard the arguments of learned counsels for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance.
4. This is a pre-arrest bail petition and only tentative assessment can be made of the evidentiary material produced before the Court at this stage. It is discernable from the bare perusal of the FIR that there existed a business relationship between the complainant and the petitioner much prior to the registration of the FIR. During the investigation of the case, Investigating Officer has concluded that the business relationship between the parties existed since the year 2015 and the matter between them was related to rendition of accounts and not to the repayment of loan or fulfillment of any existing obligation. Prior to the registration of this FIR, the petitioner had also filed a suit seeking cancellation of the cheques in dispute on 27.05.2019. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also pointed out towards a contract signed between the petitioner and complainant wherein it was agreed between the parties that a loan of Rs.50,00,000/- was being extended to the petitioner and in repayment thereof the petitioner had contracted that he would surrender his tractor and his land to the complainant for the period of ten years lease in case of failure of repayment of said loan. Furthermore during the investigation of the case receipts of transactions between the parties had been produced by the petitioner and the complainant as well. This aspect of the case also establishes that there was a business relationship existing between the parties much prior to the registration of the said FIR. Prima facie , the circumstances indicate that the cheques in question were not issued towards repayment of some outstanding loan or fulfillment of an existing obligation but instead they had been issued to meet a possible future obligation if determined as a result of some other exercise. In the instant FIR, no date has been mentioned as to when the petitioner had allegedly obtained any money from the complainant with regard to whose repayment he had issued the three cheques in question. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued "that the petitioner has caused financial ruin of the complainant and has caused huge loss of Rs.30,00,000/- to him. Suffice is to observe that for the purpose of recovery of the said loss suffered by the complainant, during the business transactions, remedy lies somewhere else under the law. Prima facie, a civil dispute cannot be coloured into a criminal one by lodging of the FIR in respect of an offence under Section 489-F , PPC. In an identical situation, the August Supreme Court of Pakistan in Mian Allah Dita's case reported as 2013 SCMR 51 held that "prima facie, the circumstances indicate that the cheque in question was not issued towards repayment of some outstanding loan or fulfillment of an existing obligation but instead it had been issued to meet a possible future obligation if determined as a result of some other exercise. That being so, one of the foundational elements of Section 489-F , P.P.C. is prima facie missing. The invocation of penal provision would therefore remain a moot point. The ground that prosecution is motivated by notice may not in these circumstances be ill founded."
Investigation of the case is complete and the version of the petitioner as well as complainant has been verified by the Investigating Officer during the investigation of the same. In view of the matter the assertion of the earned counsel for the petitioner that the involvement of the petitioner in the case seems to be based on mala fide and malicious intent, is an assertion which cannot be said to be without substance or foundation at this stage. Nothing is to be recovered from the possession of the petitioner . Liberty of the citizens has always been jealously guarded by this Court. Sending the petitioner behind the bars at this stage would cause irreparable loss to his reputation.
Reliance is placed on the case of Khalil Ahmad Soomro and others v. The State (PLD 2017 SC 730) wherein the following principle has been enunciated: "Although for grant of pre-arrest bail one of the pre condition is that the accused person has to show that his arrest I intended by the prosecution out of mala fide and for ulterior consideration. At pre-arrest bail stage, it is difficult to prove the element of mala fide by the accused through positive/solid evidence/m aterials and, the same is to be deduced and inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case and if some event: hints to that effect are available, the same would validly constitute the element of mala fide."
5. In view of the above discussion, this petition is allowed an the ad-interim pre-a rrest bail already granted to the petitioner namely , Aman Ullah, by this Court, vide' order dated 27.08.2019 is confirmed subject to his furnishing of fresh bail bonds in the sum ( Rs.200,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties i the like amount to. the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
6. Needless to mention that any observations made in to above order are tentative in nature and shall not influence the Court in any manner .