BADREY and 3 others vs THE STATE and anothers

' Having been involved in case registered vide F.I.R. No,361, dated 17-8-1999 under section 419/420/468/471, P.P.C. At Police Station Kabal, the accused-petitioners applied for their release on bail in the Court of learned Ilaqa Qazi, Swat but the same was dismissed vide order, dated 16-10- 1999. Thereafter, they moved the Court of learned Additional Sessions/Azafi Zila Qazi, Swat but their application met the same fate and was dismissed vide order, dated 1-11-1999. They have moved this Court for their release on bail.

2. Habibullah complainant submitted an application to the S.S.P., Swat to the effect that the accused-petitioners by playing fraud upon him grabbed Rs,34,000 in order to get him visa from Qattar. They neither provided Visa nor returned the money. On his application the S.S.P., Swat vide his order, dated 17-8-1999 directed the S.H.O., Kabal to proceed in accordance with law on which the present F.I.R. Was registered.

3. The main argument of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the case. Sections 420/468 and 471 are bailable while maximum sentence envisaged in section 419, P.P.C. Is 7 years. The dispute if any between the parties is that of a civil nature and needs determination by the Civil Court. It was also argued that the complainant has compromised the matter and has no objection if the petitioners are released on bail. In this regard compromise and affidavits of complainant are also placed on file.

4. On the other hand the learned A.A.-G. Opposed the grant of bail on the ground that a gang consisting of accused and other have defrauded many innocent people and looted a huge amount from them, hence they do not deserve to be released on bail.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. A case for grant of bail is made out; firstly, because the sections of law with which the accused- petitioners are charged do not fall under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. And withholding of bail as a measure of advance punishment would neither promote the cause of justice nor object of law; secondly, the complainant has compromised the matter with the accused-petitioners and the learned counsel for the petitioners has placed the compromise as well as affidavit executed by the complainant that he has no objection if the accused-petitioners are released on bail; thirdly the investigation of the case is complete and challan of the case is likely to be put into the trial Court. The conclusion of trial of accused would obviously take some time but its conclusion could not be predicted; fourthly, the element of fraud or dishonesty on the part of the accused is yet to be discovered during the trial. I, therefore, direct that the accused- petitioners be released on bail -provided they (each one of them) furnish bail bonds to the tune of Rs,2,00,000 (two lacs) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, Swat who shall see that the sureties are local, reliable and men of means. Announced.