ORDER   SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Crl.Bail Appln.No.S-112 of 2021.

_______________________________________________________________________

DATE                                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________________

For hearing of bail application.

28.10.2021

                        Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Safdar Ali Ghouri, Advocate for complainant.

Mr. Abdul Ghaffar Kalhoro, Addl. Prosecutor General for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

IRSHAD ALI SHAH - J;- It is alleged that the applicant issued dishonestly a cheque for rupees Three Lacs in favour of complainant Meeral Khan, on  account of purchase of two buffaloes from him, which was bounced when it was presented before the concerned Bank for encashment, and on being approached by the complainant for return of his money, the applicant threatened the complainant of dire murder, for that the present case was registered.

                        The applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned    6^th Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application under section 498-A Cr.PC.

                        It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party on account of sale/purchase of the buffaloes; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about forty days that too after having recourse under section 22-A and B Cr.PC; the case is at the verge of its final disposal and the offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC, therefore, the applicant is entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail, as he is apprehending his unjustified arrest at the hands of police, which is motivated by the complainant.

                        Learned Additional Prosecutor General for the State and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicant by contending that the applicant has deprived the complainant of his money by issuing a cheque in his favour dishonestly.

                        I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

                        The FIR of the incident has been lodged by the complainant with delay of about forty days and such delay could not be overlooked. The parties are said to be disputed over the sale/purchase of buffaloes. The offence alleged against the applicant is not falling within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.PC. The case is at the verge of its final disposal. The applicant has never misused the concession of pre-arrest bail. In these circumstances, a case for grant of pre-arrest bail in favour of the applicant on point of malafide obviously is made out.

                        In view of above, the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

                        The instant bail application is disposed of accordingly.

  J U D G E