IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Bail
Application No.707 of 2025
|
DATE |
ORDER WITH
SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs |
For
hearing of bail application
--------------------------------------------
15.04.2025
Mr.
Tassaduq Nadeem, advocate
for applicant
Ms.
Rubina Qadir, D.P.G.
Mr.
Fasih-uz-Zaman Abbasi,
advocate for complainant
DIGP
Karachi West Irfan Ali Baloch
& SP Dr. Anam present
-------------------------------------------
Applicant
Syed Ahsan Haider Sherazi seeks post arrest bail in FIR No.39/2025,
registered at P.S. Taimuria for offence under
sections 408, 506, 34, PPC, after rejection of his bail plea by learned
Additional Sessions Judge-V, Karachi Central, vide order dated 07.03.2025.
2. Briefly,
the facts of case are that present applicant who was Sales and Country Head of
High Tag Green Mills Pvt. Limited, in collusion with other employee,
misappropriated Rs.21,989,722/-, however, they promised to deposit such amount
in the Company‘s account but later on refused, hence the subject FIR.
3. Learned
counsel for applicant contended that the applicant is innocent and he has been
falsely roped in this case against the actual facts and circumstances; that the
F.I.R is delayed for 10 days; that applicant/accused was employee of the
Company, he left the job and asked to Company to clear his service dues, which
caused annoyance to them as such he has been involved in a false case; that
neither any details of sale has mentioned in FIR nor any person from the market
has been shown as witness in the instant case; that the alleged offence does
not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC,
rather the case of the applicant requires further in terms of subsection (2) of
Section 497, Cr.PC.
4. Conversely,
learned D.P.G appearing for the State, assisted by learned counsel for
complainant, vehemently opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the
applicant being employee of the company has committed breach of trust,
misappropriated a huge amount of sale proceeds and did not deposit the same in
the company’s account and lastly prayed for dismissal of instant bail
application.
5. I
have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for parties and
perused the material available on the record.
6 Admittedly,
there is delay of 10 days in registration of F.I.R without furnishing any
plausible explanation; that investigation is complete, challan
has been submitted and the applicant is no more required for investigation
purpose. He is behind bars since his arrest. Furthermore, the offence with which the
applicant stands charged fall within non-prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.PC. All these circumstances, prima-facie, establish that
the case against applicant falls within the purview of Section 497(2) Cr.PC, entitling him to grant of bail on merits. It is
settled law that grant of bail in the offences not falling within the
prohibitory clause is a rule and refusal is an exception. Reliance is placed on
the case of Tariq Bashir vs. The State (PLD 1995 Supreme Court 34). Therefore,
applicant/accused above named is admitted to post
arrest bail, subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.300,000/- (Rupees Three
Hundred Thousand Only) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction
of the trial Court.
7. Needless
to say, that the above observations are tentative in nature, and shall not
prejudice the case of either party at trial.
8.
Instant criminal bail application stands disposed of in the above terms.
J U D G E