ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA.

1^st Crl. Bail Appln. No.S-586  of 2023.

Date                           Order with signature of Hon’ble Judge

1. For orders on office objection.

2. For  hearing of Bail Application.

Mr. Sher Ali Chandio, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Imran Mubeen Khan, Asst. Prosecutor General.

Complainant Khalid Hayat Ali present in person.

Date of Hearing      : 30.10.2023.

O R D E R

                        Applicant Riaz Hussain Lakhair through this application seeks his admission on pre-arrest bail in crime No.62 of 2023, registered at Police Station Sita Road, under section 489-F, PPC. Earlier, his application seeking pre-arrest bail was dismissed on 11-10-2023 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Dadu.

2.         The background to this case is that on 21-9-2023, complainant Khalid Hayat Ali Arain lodged the aforementioned F.I.R. narrating therein that cheque No.1825918072 delivered to him by applicant/ accused Riaz Hussain Lakhair, against 2641 maunds of rice purchased by him from complainant, on presentation before the concerned bank on the due date i.e. 20.03.2022 was dishonoured on the ground of no balance; then despite repeated approaches by the complainant, the accused failed to clear such dues; hence, after receiving orders from the Court complainant lodged FIR to the above effect.

3.         I have heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Addl. P.G and with their able assistance also perused the record.

4.         Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the case has been challaned, which is pending in the Court of II-Judicial Magistrate, Dadu, where it is now fixed on 01.11.2023 for framing of charge. He further submits that the amount involved in this case is not huge one; besides the applicant has joined the trial proceedings, therefore, case against the applicant requires further enquiry.

5.         Learned Addl. P.G. submits that the applicant is nominated in the FIR and the cheque issued by him has been dishonoured by the bank concerned, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

6.         Complainant Khalid Hayat Ali is present in person and Mr.Muhammad Azam Sohu advocate files Vakalatnama on his behalf, which is taken on record. He while opposing the bail application submits that the applicant has usurped huge amount of complainant, therefore, he is not entitled for concession of pre-arrest bail. He, however, could not controvert the fact that the alleged offence carries maximum punishment of 03 years.

7.         Admittedly the incident had occurred on 20.11.2021 and report whereof was lodged on 21.9.2023 i.e. after the delay of almost 02 years and no plausible explanation has been furnished for such an inordinate delay. The case in hand is based upon documentary evidence, which is in custody of prosecution itself, therefore, after recording evidence of the prosecution witnesses if prosecution may succeed to prove its case, even then the maximum punishment beyond 03 years could not be visualized. In the circumstances and in view of delay in lodgment of FIR, the case against the applicant is prima facie one of further enquiry as envisaged under sub-section (2) to Section 497, Cr.P.C, which makes the applicant entitled for the concession of bail.

8.         Accordingly, instant bail application is allowed and the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant on 16.10.2023 is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

9.         The above observations are tentative in nature, which shall not influence the trial Court, in any manner, while conducting trial of the case.

                                                                                                                        JUDGE

                                                                                                                            JUDGE

Qazi Tahir/*