2006 PLP 2977 (YLR)

SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, J.

The petitioner has applied for post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.391 of 2005, dated 1-6-2005 under sections 380, 170, 419, 420, P.P.C. registered at Police Station, Ghulam Muhammad Abad, district Faisalabad.

2. The brief facts of the case are that Muhammad Iqbal, complainant submitted application before police that petitioner used to reside in his "Baithic" and that he pretended himself as police Inspector. He stated that 2-1/2 months back petitioner along with his co-accused (Rana Mubarak) took Rs.1,86,000 from him, Muhammad Hanif, Shaukat Ali and Mustafa through fraud and that later on he came to know that petitioner is not a police Inspector. Also that petitioner took away his licensed pistol. On his application present case was registered against the petitioner and he was accordingly arrested on 28-6-2005. Hence this bail application.

3. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Further submits that there is delay of 2-1/2 months in lodging the F.I.R. and the same has not been explained by the complainant, which makes the prosecution story doubtful. He contended that nothing was recovered from the petitioner. He further contended that petitioner is in judicial lock-up since 28-6-2005 but trial has not commenced so far. He has argued that petitioner is not previous convict and that offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, petitioner deserves concession of bail.

5. On the other hand learned counsel for the State has opposed this application on the grounds that petitioner is named in F.I.R.; that he took away Rs.1,86,000 from the complainant and P.Ws.; that he pretended himself a Police Inspector and that his co-accused has not been arrested so far.

6. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties with care. As mentioned above the allegation against the petitioner is that he along with his co-accused (Rana Mubarak) took Rs.1,86,000 from the complainant and P.Ws. through fraud. There is unexplained delay of 2-1/2 months in lodging the F.I.R. and petitioner is entitled to get benefit of the same. He is in judicial lock up since 28-6-2005 but according to learned counsel for the petitioner trial has not commenced so far. The petitioner does not appear to be previous convict. The offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. In these circumstances without going into merits of the case. I find it a fit case for grant of bail to the petitioner. As such application brought by him is accepted and he is allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. However, if petitioner fails to appear before learned trial Court on any date of hearing the trial Court would be competent to cancel his bail. The observations made in this order would not prejudice case of either party during trial. H.B.T./I-50/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.