DISHONOUR CHEQUE PRE ARREST BAIL DISMISSED

IN THE COURT OF  ADDITIONAL  SESSIONS JUDGE, LAHORE

                                                        Bail Petition No._________/

                  Abbas.                   Versus.                   State.

                  

                                  PRE ARREST BAIL PETITION:

                                             

                                        Case FIR No.319/0000,

                                         Offence U/S.489-F/PPC,

                                     P.S.  Bazar, Lahore.

                               DATE OF DECISION: 29-09-2015.

O R D E R:

Present:      Learned counsel for the parties.

                   Learned ADPP on behalf of state.

                   Accused/petitioner  Abbas son of Muhammad has applied for pre-arrest bail, which is out come of above said FIR.

2-                It has been alleged by the complainant against the accused that he issued Cheque mentioned in the record, which was dishonoured on presentation. Hence, FIR of instant interim bail.

3-                Learned counsel for the accused/petitioner has argued  that petitioner has never issued Cheque to complainant, this fact clearly establish the malafide of complainant. Petitioner is not even conversant to the complainant. No date and time is mentioned in the FIR. PW is opponent of petitioner. Civil suit is pending regarding impugned cheque. Nothing is to be recovered. Money is also not to be recovered from the petitioner by the police. Accused/ petitioner is not required by the police, as investigation is complete. Petitioner/accused is respectable citizen. Petitioner/accused has been falsely involved in the petty amount of Rs.200,000/-. As per finding of I.O. cheque was not issued to complainant, rather the Cheque was issued to one Idrees. This fact proves malafide of complainant making it case of further inquiry. Rent matter is pending between the petitioner/accused and complainant party. Accused/petitioner have instituted suit regarding Cheque, investigation is complete. In the end, learned counsel has relied upon 2007 P.Cr.LJ 1064 Lahore, 2009 YLR 28-Lahore, 2013 SCMR 51 and 2015 P.Cr.LJ 129 Islamabad and prayed for  confirmation of interim bail.

4-                While on the other hand, learned ADPP dully assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the arguments of learned counsel for the accused/petitioner with this contention that signature and issuance of Cheque are admitted by the accused/ petitioner. Malafide on the part of complainant could  not be proved. Accused/petitioner is habitual offender and Cheque was issued fraudulently. Accused/petitioner was found guilty during the course of investigation. In the end, they prayed for dismissal of instant interim bail petition.

5-                Heard. Perused.

6-                After hearing the arguments and perusal of record, it has been revealed that signature on the impugned Cheque are admitted  one by the petitioner/accused. Likewise account and issuance of Cheque is also admitted by petitioner. No malafide of complainant could be established. Petitioner was found guilty during the investigation. August case law relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner is different to the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Hence, of no avail.

7-                Under these circumstances, instant bail petition is hereby dismissed. File be consigned.

Announced:

29-09-2015.

                                                   

                                                                                 Addl. Sessions Judge,

                                                            Lahore.