2013 PLP 945 (YLR)

FAROOQ ALI CHANNA, J.

This post-arrest bail application has been moved for the grant of bail to accused Masroor-ul-Islam who has been booked in F.I.R. No.363 of 2011 under sections 420/ 489-F, P.P.C. Police Station Defence lodged by complainant Nadir Ali Khan. He has alleged in the F.I.R. that the complainant had the business of plotting with Muhammad Iqbal and his relatives including the present applicant Masroor-ul-Islam. He invested Rs.1,88,00,000 (Rupees One Crore Eighty Eight lacs) and against that investment the accused provided him Photostat copies of plots and Masroor-ul-Islam also executed Power of Attorney in his favour. All the documents of the properties, provided to him, after verification were found forged, therefore, he asked the accused for return of money. Ultimately Muhammad Iqbal with consent of other accused gave his 5 post-dated cheques which on presentation were dishonoured, therefore, he lodged the F.I.R. Heard Mr. Ali Nawaz, Advocate for the applicant accused. He has contended that the case is false and fabricated and the specific allegation of issuing post-dated cheques is against co-accused Muhammad Iqbal and not against the present accused. He further contended that no forged document has been handed over by the accused/applicant to the complainant and it was the business transaction between the complainant and Muhammad Iqbal. The applicant accused being the uncle of Muhammad Iqbal, has been implicated in this case falsely to pressurize the main accused for the settlement of business dispute. The Power of Attorney executed by the applicant Masroor-ul-Islam in favour of the complainant is a genuine document. He has further contended that all the sections applied in the F.I.R. are not punishable more than 7 years, hence does not fall under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Mr. Mahmood Habibullah filed power on behalf of the complainant which is taken on record. He also requested for adjournment which was declined as the proper opportunity was already given to the complainant to engage the Advocate, if desired. He made appearance on each date of hearing but did not engage the Advocate and when the matter was taken for arguments Mr. Mahmood Habibullah filed power. The said conduct of the complainant seems to be a delaying tactic and nothing else which is not admissible under the law. However, learned A.P.-G. has opposed the grant of bail application and has contended that the complainant was cheated jointly by the present accused and his other family members including female members. The cheques were issued by Muhammad Iqbal with the consent of present accused, hence he is equally responsible and fully involved in this case. The same set of accused involved in this case is also involved in another F.I.R. No.169 of 2011 under section 489-F/420/34, P.P.C. which shows that the accused are habitual offenders of cheating the innocent persons and depriving them of their valuable assets hence deserves no concession of bail. I have heard the arguments and perused the record. Admittedly it was co-accused Muhammad Iqbal who issued cheques in favour of complainant which on presentation was dishonoured, hence implication of section 489-F against the present accused is yet to be seen. Section 420, P.P.C. is bailable offence. The rest of the sections of P.P.C. i.e. 406/467 and 471, P.P.C. although not applied in the F.I.R. and added in challan sheet but yet the same are not punishable more than 7 years, hence does not fall under prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and it is settled principle of law that the offence which does not fall under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. the bail is a rule and its refusal is an exception. In this case no exceptional circumstances appear, therefore, I grant bail to the accused subject to furnishing the surety in the sum of Rs.100,000 (Rupees one lac only) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this court. MWA/M-6/K Bail granted.