JAVED IQBAL Versus THE STATE

ORDER

Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No.118 of 2001 registered on 15‑9‑2001 under sections 161/162, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 with Police Station Anti‑Corruption Establishment, Faisalabad on the application of Mst. Parveen Akhtar.

1. The brief allegations against the petitioner are that he obtained an amount of Rs.30,000 from the complainant for Shaukat, A.S.I. of Police Department in the presence of Muhammad Yar and Sardar Khan for favouring her in a criminal case.

2. Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this bail application on the ground that the petitioner is involved in five criminal cases and is not entitled to any discretionary relief from this Court.

3. Learned State counsel has also opposed this bail application on the ground that the petitioner is nominated accused in the F.I.R. and he does not deserve for any relief from this Court.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the complainant as also the State and also perused the record. The contention raised by the learned counsel for the complainant is that the petitioner is involved in the five criminal cases. On the last date of hearing directed the Investigating Officer to produce the list of cases in which the petitioner is involved. According to him the petitioner was involved in case F.I.R. No.476 registered on 4‑7‑2001 under sections 406 and 420, P.P.C. Similarly another case F.I.R. No.478 on the same date has been registered under section 354, P.P.C. against the petitioner. It has been stated by the Investigating Officer that both the cases were found false and have been cancelled by the police. The third case which is pending against the petitioner is lodged by Mst. Parveen Akhtar through F.I.R. No.668 registered on 13‑9‑2001 under sections 337/A‑1, 337/A and 379/148/149, P.P.C. with Police Station Saddar, Faisalabad, which is under investigation with the D.S.P. Saddar Faisalabad. The petitioner is not a previous convict and the claim of the learned counsel for the complainant is not borne out from the record that the, petitioner has a criminal history. The petitioner has been involved in a case which does not fall within the prohibitory clause. The grant of bail in such circumstances is a rule and refusal is an exception. I do not find any exceptional circumstance in this case for the refusal of bail to the petitioner.

5. This application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Ilaqa/Judicial Magistrate, Faisalabad.

6. Copy dasti.

H.B.T./J‑65/L Bail granted.