' Through this Order, I intend to dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No,4083-B of 2002 filed by Iftikhar Ahmad Farooqi and Criminal Miscellaneous No,4084-B of 2002 filed by Ali Iftikhar Farooqi as both the applications have arisen due to the registration of case F.I.R. No,337 of 2002 dated 20-5-2002 under sections 420, 468 and 471, P.P.C. At Police Station Gulberg, Lahore.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that the petitioner lftikhar Ahmad Farooqi in Criminal MiscellaneOus No,4083-B of 2002 had issued cheques amounting to Rs,32,59,950 in favor of the complainant and when presented, were dishonoured due to the insufficiency of funds in account of the petitioner. It is also stated that the co-accused namely Ali Iftikhar Farooqi in Criminal Miscellaneous No,4084-B of 2002 alongwith his father lftikhar Ahmad Farooqi co-accused had threatened the complainant with dire consequences and had pointed pistol upon the complainant wherefor he filed Writ Petition No,12649 of 2001 which was disposed of and the case was registered subsequently.
3. Syed Ali Zafar, Advocate, learned counsel for Ali Iftikhar Farooqi has contended that the petitioner is not accused of issuance of cheques and is not involved in the offences mentioned in the F.I.R., thus is not guilty for any offences under sections 468, 420 and 471, P.P.C. It is further contended that the writ petition was admittedly filed by the complainant Mian Muhammad Munir and in para. 8 and other paras. It has been mentioned that the threats were given to him by someone else and not by the petitioner Ali Iftikhar Farooqi at Bakhtawar Hotel, Abbot Road, Lahore but subsequently the complainant has changed his version by showing the occurrence within the jurisdiction of Liberty Market Police Station. In such circumstances the stance has been changed by the complainant which itself shows that the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case being son of the co-accused who has issued the cheques.
4. Mr. M. Shahid Maqbool Sheikh, Advocate, appearing on behalf of Iftikhar Ahmad Farooqi petitioner in Criminal Miscellaneous No,4083-B of 2002 has contended that it is a civil dispute, as at the most the dispute of money is between the complainant and the petitioner Iftikhar Ahmad .Farooqi, which the complainant has converted into criminal offence with mala fide intention and ulterior motive in order to pressurise the petitioner to make the payment to him under the pressure of the police. It is further contended that the dates of the cheques which were allegedly issued by the petitioner have been changed and petitioner admits that he had issued the cheques but these were issued as security to the complainant party which deals in money laundering and the petitioner also uses to take money from them from time to time while nothing was due from the petitioner and the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. Are false. It is further contended that earlier inquiry was conducted by the S.P. Cantt. And it was found that it is a civil dispute and the case was not liable to be registered but due to the filing of the writ petition police has misinterpreted the order of this Court and has falsely lodged the F.I.R. It is further contended that the petitioner is not involved in any case falling within the prohibitory clause, who is an aged man besides an infirm person and he may be granted bail.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this bail application on the ground that the bail before arrest is meant to protect the innocent citizen and the petitioner has failed to point out any mala fides on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate him in this case. It is further contended that earlier the stand of Iftikhar Ahmad Farooqi petitioner was that he had never issued the cheques but when the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory was found positive and in favor of the prosecution case, he has changed the stand that he had issued the cheques saying that these were issued earlier than the period mentioned in the F.I.R. It is further contended that huge amount has been misappropriated of the complainant by the petitioners and they are not entitled to discretionary relief by this Court. It is further contended that the issuance of cheques and the bouncing of The same itself is sufficient that the complainant has been deceived and fraudulent people should not be given extraordinary relief by this Court.
6. Learned counsel for the State has also opposed this application.
7. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record carefully. Ali Iftikhar Farooqi has been alleged that he on the pistol point had threatened the complainant at Liberty Market and has also threatened the complainant with dire consequences.
This fact found mentioned in the same manner in Writ Petition No,12649 of 2001 filed by the complainant which is also admitted by the complainant. The possibility of false implication of Ali Iftikhar Farooqi in this case cannot be ruled out and the complainant prima facie has introduced a different story to involve Ali Iftikhar Farooqi in this case as he is son of co-accused Iftikhar Ahmed Farooqi who allegedly has issued the cheques in favor of the complainant. The mala fides of the complainant in such circumstances cannot be ruled out to falsely implicate Ali Iftikhar Farooqi in this case. He has succeeded in making out a case for bail before arrest. The ad interim bail before arrest already granted to Ali Iftikhar Farooqi petitioner on 18-6-2002 is hereby confirmed. He is directed to furnish fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Ilaqa/Judicial Magistrate, Lahore.
8. As far as the case of co-accused iftikhar Ahmad Faroocqi in Criminal Miscellaneous No,4083-B of 2002 is concerned admittedly he has issued the cheques in favor of the complainant amounting to Rs,32,59,950 and when these cheques were presented before the Bank these cheques have not been encashed due to the insufficiency of funds. The petitioner had made a promise with the complainant for the payment of the huge amount by issuing of cheques and prima facie is guilty of the offence mentioned in this petition. The bail before arrest is meant to protect innocent citizens who are involved falsely with mala fide intention and ulterior motive. The cheques admittedly which were issued by the complainant have been bounced. The petitioner is not entitled to the extraordinary relief for grant of bail before arrest under section 498, Cr.P.C. Even otherwise sufficient evidence is also on the record to connect the petitioner Iftikhar Ahmad Farooqi with the commission of the crime. His application is accordingly dismissed.