' Petitioner seeks bail after arrest in a case registered against him and others vide F.I.R. No.167 of 1996 under sections 409/420/ 467/468/471/109, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, with Police Station ACE, Multan Region, on the complaint of District Food Controller, Bahawalpur. Gravement of the charge, as it appears from the F.I.R. Is that the petitioner along With others was a private supplier of wheat to the Food Department and during different inquiries, 3182.705 Metric Tons of wheat of the value of Rs.1,57,54,548 was found missing/misappropriated. The allegation against the petitioner is that he through fictitious bills of 1000 bags of wheat of the value of Rs.4,00,950 misappropriated the public money causing loss to the public exchequer.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an inordinate delay in the registration of case regarding bills which were undeniably approved by the functionaries of the Food Department on 11-6-1995 and F.I.R. Was registered on 10-12-1996 with a delay of almost six months and thereafter the petitioner was arrested on 16-12-2003. He further submits that the petitioner was found innocent by the Investigating Officer vide his report dated 14-2-2003 and that his case is one of further inquiry because the missing/misappropriated quantity of what, as detailed in two F.I.Rs.
Nos.167 and 168 of 1996, is much less than the quantity mentioned therein. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has committed no offence and he has been falsely involved because his bills concerning 1000 bags of the value of Rs.4,00,950 were not denied by the official of the Food Department.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, opposed grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner has been named in the F.I.R. And a specific quantity of misappropriated wheat has been attributed to him. He further submitted that since on account of abscondance of other co-accused challan of the case could not be submitted, which is now ready for submission and thus the petitioner is not entitled to bail.
4. I have anxiously considered the respective arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the record. Bills dated 11-6-1995 showing delivery of wheat by the petitioner are not denied to have been issued by the employees of Food Department. Prosecution has, so far collected no evidence incriminating him with the alleged offence for showing any connivance or conspiracy among the petitioner and the employees of the Food Department. Prima facie there appears to be no evidence showing involvement of the petitioner in the false and fake preparation of bills, on the basis of which the case has been registered. Petitioner was found innocent by the Investigating Officer and his case is of further inquiry as the quantity claimed to be missing/ misappropriated is discrepant to the one mentioned in the two F.I.Rs. Nos.167 and 168 of 1996.
Petitioner was arrested on 16-12-2002 and he after joining police investigation has been remitted to judicial lock-up. He will face the sentence, if ultimately convicted in the case, at the conclusion of the trial. I accordingly accept this petition and allow him bail in the case registered against him, in the sum of Rs.5,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.