ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No. S – 504 of 2017

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

For hearing of bail application

07.09.2018

Mr. Muhammad Arif Malik Advocate for the applicant

Mr. Fidaullah Qureshi Advocate for the complainant

Mr. Abdul Rehman Kolachi, DPG for the State

>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<

Through instant bail application, the applicant/accused Shahid Ali Rajput has sought pre-arrest bail in Crime No.53/2017 registered at police station ‘A’ Section Sukkur, for an offences under Section 489-F, 420 and 506/2 PPC.

The facts as per FIR registered by complainant Muhammad Shabbir on 11.05.2017 at Police Station ‘A’ Section Sukkur, stating therein that he own Bungalow No.107/2 on an area of 150 square yards situated in Sukkur Society, whereas, applicant Shahid Ali being known to him on 20.02.2016 entered into an agreement to sell of the said bungalow for a consideration of Rs.48,00,000/- and paid advance amount of Rs.10,00,000/- and promised for payment of Rs.18,00,000/- after one month and also issued cheque No.A-55081335 for an amount of Rs.20,00,000/- of Meezan Bank March Bazaar Sukkur for the date 01.06.2016 in the name of his wife Nousheen Latif and possession of the bungalow was handed over to the Shahid Ali, who applied his own locks thereon. It is further stated that as per commitment the amount of Rs.18,00,000/- was not paid by Shahid Ali, whereas, the cheque of Rs.20,00,000/- of Meezan bank on presentation was also bounced due to insufficient funds in her account and such memorandum was issued, whereas, another agreement was executed as per the demand of Shahid Ali that the complainant may return an amount of Rs.500,000/- to him and he issued another cheque No.A-93833756 for an amount of Rs.43,00,000/- of Meezan Bank Sukkur dated 13.04.2017 and on presentation the said cheque was also dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The complainant from time to time approached Shahid Ali and demanded his amount, but no satisfactory response was given to him, ultimately a month back, the complainant along with his nephew Rafaqat Ali S/o Munir Ahmed and his son Muhammad Aamir were standing beside his house, it was 1:00 p.m when accused Shahid Ali Rajput along with his 02 accomplices came there and took out pistol and threatened the complainant for dire-consequences, in case he demanded the sale consideration of the bungalow, therefore, the complainant filed such Criminal Miscellaneous Application before the Sessions Judge / Ex-Officio Justice of Peace Sukkur and such order as passed in his favour, hence such FIR was lodged.

Learned counsel submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant due to dispute over the sale of a bungalow, whereas, the applicant has paid the entire sale consideration amount to the applicant and such possession as well as documents have been delivered to the applicant by the complainant; that the allegations are false and the prosecution story is managed and concocted one; that there is no independent eye-witness of the incident; that the applicant in good faith had given cheque to the applicant, whereas, he paid the entire amount in cash, hence on demand the complainant started creating hurdles for the applicant, if the applicant would not have paid the amount, then how the complainant had given the possession as well as documents to the applicant; that no such threats of murder have been issued by the applicant to the complainant being a respectable citizen. He lastly prayed that the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant may be confirmed.

Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned DPG on the other hand have vehemently opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant/accused and further contended that the applicant while purchasing the bungalow from the complainant has failed to pay the sale consideration, but has issued fake cheques first in the name of his wife, whereas, another of Meezan Bank Sukkur, but both the cheques were bounced due to insufficient funds, as such the applicant has cheated with the complainant and has committed the offence, hence he is not entitled for the extra ordinary concession of pre-arrest bail.

I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant/accused, learned DPG for the State and counsel for the complainant and have perused the record. The applicant/accused had purchased a bungalow from the complainant and on payment of advance amount as per commitment the possession was handed over to him, whereas, the applicant/accused failed to play his part and did not pay any single penny to the complainant as per the said commitment, but played fraud with him firstly he issued a cheque in the name of his wife Mst. Nosheen Latif which on presentation before the concerned Bank was bounced, but another commitment was made that the complainant should return half of the earnest amount of Rs.500,000/- and he would give another cheque of Rs.43,00,000/-, as such the applicant in good faith returned the said amount and received the cheque for Rs.43,00,000/- which on presentation before the concerned Bank was too dishonoured due to insufficient funds, which perhaps was issued by the applicant/accused intentionally and deliberately just to cheat the complainant and has deprived him of his lucrative sale consideration amount of the bungalow. In my humble view, if such practice is allowed to be continued in our society, the people do not hesitate to cheat the owners of the properties in smooth manner. The applicant/accused has not produced any proof regarding payment of the sale consideration to the complainant, whereas, the people are so vigilant in making the payments, if he would have paid the sale consideration, he must have produced such receipt or document and the mode of payment. In my view the applicant has failed to make out a case of further inquiry and he does not deserve for any extra ordinary concession of pre-arrest bail. Consequently, the interim pre-arrest bail earlier granted to the applicant on 28.08.2017 is hereby recalled and bail application is dismissed.

Judge

ARBROHI