This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused, Zahid Iqbal, who was charged under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) regarding the dishonor of two cheques issued to the complainant. The petitioner argued that there was an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and contended that the cheques were issued as a guarantee rather than for a debt. The State and the complainant opposed the bail, noting that the issuance of the cheques was admitted, which serves as an acknowledgment of liability, and that the challan had been submitted with the charge already framed. The Court held that since the issuance of the cheques was admitted and there was no immediate evidence supporting the claim that they were issued as a guarantee, the petitioner failed to make a case for bail at this stage. The Court emphasized that the petitioner could substantiate his defense during the trial. Consequently, the bail petition was dismissed, with a specific direction to the trial court to conclude the proceedings within two months.
ASAD MUNIR, J.---Zahid Iqbal son of Abdul Rashid seeks post arrest bail in case F.LR. No,341, dated 15-10-2009 for offence under section 489-F, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Industrial Aread, Islamabad at the instance of Ghulam Mustafa.
2. The allegation in the F.I.R. is that the petitioner issued two cheques to the complainant one for Rs,6,00,000 and the other for Rs,1150,000 but both the cheques were dishonored by the bank upon presentation.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there is an unexplained delay in lodging the F.I.R. against the petitioner who is in jail since 18-10-2009. It is also contended that the cheque was not due and payable as it was given as a guarantee and not in consideration of any amount due from the petitioner to the complainant.
4. Learned .Standing Counsel supported by the counsel for the complainant, has opposed the bail on the ground that the issuance of the cheques by the petitioner is admitted which is an acknowledgement that the amount in question was due. Learned Standing Counsel has further stated that the challan has been submitted and the trial is likely to be concluded soon as the charge has also been framed by the learned trial Court.
5. I have given due consideration to the respective arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.
6. Cheques in question has been admitted to be issued by the petitioner and no evidence has been shown to indicate that the cheques in question were issued by way A of guarantee. However, the petitioner will have the opportunity to prove his assertion that the cheques were issued as a guarantee at the trial which I am assured by the D.P.-G. will be concluded within a short period. In the circumstances, the petition for bail is refused but the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within two months.