1993 P Cr (PLP)

This is an application for bail after arrest by Muhammad Nawaz petitioner in a case F.I.R. No. 64 dated 5-3-1992 under sections 419/420 and 468/471, P.P.C. registered against him at P.S. Rail Bazar, Faisalabad.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case as contained in the F.I.R. lodged by one S.M. Ali Zaidi, Vice-President/Chief Manager, Habib Bank Ltd., Main Branch, Faisalabad, are that on 5-3-1992, petitioner Muhammad Nawaz presented two cheques bearing Nos.12073794 and 12873796 of the value of Rs.11,50,000 and 9,50,000 respectively for payment, directly to the Cash Department with a view to avoid earlier processing at the hands - of the concerned Bank counter. Smelling some foul play the Cash Department made enquiry from the Finance Department so as to check the authenticity of the said cheques, getting positive report the petitioner was caught hold of by the Bank employees and was handed over to the police with the abovesaid report, which formed the basis for the present F.I.R. Having remained unsuccessful in the Sessions Court, the petitioner has come to this Court with the instant bail petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in the judicial lock-up for the last about 7 months and the trial has not yet started. He further submits that the person of the petitioner is not wanted by the police as no recovery whatsoever is to be effected from him. It is submitted that the petitioner who was a peon and illiterate person might have been innocent victim of a gang behind the curtain. He further asserts that neither the alleged forgery of the cheques has been witnessed by anyone nor it is alleged that the petitioner has forged the cheques. According to him, at the most his act, of presentation of the cheques may fall in the purview of section 471, P.P.C. which is bailable offence and the petitioner entitles himself as of right to claim the bail.

4. On the other hand, learned Assistant Advocate-General vehemently argues that the petitioner himself was the member of the gang and was consciously in possession of the forged cheques which he presented directly to the Cash Department avoiding the required scrutiny. The forged cheques were of the value of Rs.21,00,000 (Twenty-one lacs) and such huge amount could not be collected except through confederate of confidence. It is further submitted by the learned Law Officer, that during investigation one Nasir co-accused of petitioner was found guilty but he is concealing himself to avoid his arrest and is declared absconder. Lastly it is submitted that the petitioner was apprehended red-handed by the Bank employees, as such he is not entitled to grant of bail.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Assistant Advocate-General for the State and have perused the record with their assistance.

6. I have not been able to pursuade myself to agree with the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner as most of the contentions are presumptory in nature and carry less weight in the eye of law; to presume that the petitioner was a peon and was himself a victim of fraud being committed on him by the real culprits, would not be in accordance with requirements of law as the case against the petitioner is based on documentary as well as independent ocular evidence which cannot be brushed aside with the abovesaid presumption. There is nothing on record to establish as to with whom he was working as peon. That the criminal intention of the petitioner is also apparent from the fact that he avoided the earlier processing of the cheques by the concerned Bank counters and had directly approached the Cash Department to encash the forged cheques. That the petitioner was apprehended red-handed by the Bank employees at the time of presentation of the cheques and was later on handed over to police. The challan against the petitioner has already been put in Court and the trial is stated to be in sight. Under the above circumstances, and without going deep into the merits of the case lest it prejudice the case of either party, I decline to grant the petitioner the concession of bail which is, hereby refused.

7. The petition stands dismissed. N.H.Q./M-786/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.