IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. S-127 of 2021.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of bail application.

O R D E R.

07-02-2022.

M/s Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro and Sheeraz Fazal advocates for applicants.

Mr. Munir Ahmed Siyal Special Prosecutor FIA a/o Muhammad Zaman, Sub-Inspector FIA Cyber Crime.

Mr. Ali Raza Pathan, Assistant Attorney General, Pakistan.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., Through the instant Crl. Bail Application, applicants Muhammad Saleem Jutt and Muhammad Ali Sikandar Lund seek pre-arrest bail in crime No. 05/2021, offence u/s 13, 14, 16, 17 of PECA 2016 r/w 109, 419, 420, 468, 471, 506/2 PPC registered at PS FIA, Cyber Crime Reporting Centre Sukkur. Prior to this, the applicants have filed such application, but the same was turned down by learned III-Additional Sessions Judge, Sukkur vide order dated 18-02-2021, hence the instant bail application.

2. The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant; that complainant had paid Rs. 181,000/- to the applicants/accused and they have repaid more than Rs.600,000/- to the complainant; that all sections inserted in the FIR are bailable except section 471 & 506/2 PPC and the ingredients of said sections are lacking in the FIR and it will be considered after recording the evidence; that the FIR was registered on 26-01-2021 and since about last one year only interim challan has been submitted before the Court of law, which shows malafide on the part of investigating officer; that the investigation has been completed and the applicants are no more required for further investigation, therefore, he prays for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail.

4. On the other hand, Special Prosecutor FIA and learned AAG have vehemently opposed for grant of bail on the ground that it is offence against the society.

5. I have heard learned counsel for applicants, learned Special Prosecutor FIA as well as learned DAG and have gone through the material available on record.

6. From the bare perusal of record, it appears that the FIR was registered on 26-01-2021 and more than one year has been passed, but only the interim challan has been submitted by the Investigating officer before the Court of law and he has failed to complete the investigation for the reason best known to him. Learned counsel for the applicants/accused has pointed out that the applicants/accused have repaid more than Rs.600,000/- to the complainant, such version is also admitted by learned Special Prosecutor FIA. Moreover, the sections 13, 14, 16 & 17 PECA 2016 are bailable, while the ingredients of section 471 & 506/2 PPC are lacking in the FIR, which requires evidence. When a question was put to learned special prosecutor FIA that sections 13, 14, 16 & 17 PECA of 2016 are bailable and non-cognizable, but he has only submitted that he opposed the grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants. No exceptional circumstances had been pointed out to refuse concession of pre-arrest bail to the accused.

7. In view of above discussion, learned counsel for the applicants/accused has made out a good case for grant of pre-arrest bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC, hence the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused is confirmed on same terms and conditions. Learned trial Court is at liberty to take action against the applicants, if they misuse the concession of pre-arrest bail.

8. Needless to mention that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant on merits.

J U D G E

Nasim/P.A