ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Cr. B. A. No.1018 of 2015

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DATE                 ORDER WITH SIGNATURE(S) OF JUDGE(S) 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1)     For orders on CMA No.5675/2015

2)     For Katcha Peshi  

----------------------

 

13.08.2015

         

          Mr. Muhammad Farooq, Advocate for applicant

          Mr. Abrar Ali Khichi, A.P.G.

          ------------------------------------

 

Applicant/accused Muhammad Aslam seeks post-arrest bail in F.I.R. No.248/2015 registered at P.S. Kharadar under sections 419, 420, 468, 471 PPC.

 

Bail application was moved on behalf applicant/accused before the learned 1st Judicial Magistrate, Karachi South, the same was rejected vide order dated 06.07.2015, thereafter, applicant/accused approached learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South for the same relief but it was declined vide order dated 14.07.2015. Thereafter, applicant/accused approached this Court.

 

Mr. Muhammad Farooq, learned advocate for applicant/accused has mainly contended that applicant/accused was serving in KESC and no fraud whatsoever has been committed by him. He submitted that no PW has been examined by the prosecution with whom fraud has been committed by the applicant/accused. He has further argued that investigation is complete and challan has been submitted. He lastly contended that alleged offence does not fall with the prohibitory clause of section 497(2) Cr.PC. In support of his contentions he has relied upon the cases reported as Muhammad Hussain Shah versus the State [2014 YLR 1984 (Sindh)], Syed Azhar Abbas Rizvi and another versus the State (2012 MLD 1966 and Abdul Qayyum versus the State (2010 MLD 1251).

 

Mr. Abrar Ali Khichi, learned Assistant Prosecutor General Sindh, has argued that applicant/accused has used card of one Abdul Wahab by tampering it and he has committed fraud. He has submitted that sufficient material has been collected against applicant/accused and he has opposed the bail application.

 

I have carefully heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. I am inclined to grant bail to the applicant/accused for the reasons that no person has been examined during the investigation with whom fraud has been committed by the applicant/accused. Regarding using of card of Abdul Wahab yet it is to be established by the prosecution at the trial as plea has been raised by applicant/accused that he was serving in KESC and he was issued card by the department. Investigation is complete accused is no more required, case has already been challaned, alleged offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.PC. It is settled law that in such cases grant of bail is a rule and refusal is an exception. No exception can be granted in this case. Rightly reliance has been placed on the aforesaid authorities. Prima facie, applicant/accused has made out a case for grant of bail as the case of applicant/accused requires further inquiry as contemplated under section 497(2) Cr.PC. Applicant/accused Muhammad Aslam son of Rasool Bux is admitted to bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.200,000/- and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

 

Needless to mention here that the above observations are tentative in nature, the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same while deciding the case of applicant/accused on merits.

 

                                                                                          JUDGE

 

 Gulsher/PA