Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2025 YLR 1016
Court / Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court
Year of Decision: 2024
Decision Date: 2024-06-05
Parties: Imran Ahmed vs The State
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court on 2024-06-05, officially reported as 2025 YLR 1016. In this matter between Imran Ahmed and The State, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
Case cited as 2025 YLR 1016
Court Name: Sindh High Court Judge(s): Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro Title: Imran Ahmed vs The State Case No.: Criminal Bail Application No. 46 of 2024 Date of Judgment:2024-06-05 Reported As: 2025 YLR 1016 Result: Bail confirmed
Judgment
ORDER M UHAM M AD IQBAL KALHORO, J. Allegedly on account of some transaction on a Plot No.R-503, Sector 31/C-2, KDA Employees Society, Karachi, applicant gave three cheques of Rs.2,700,000/- each total Rs.8,100,000/- to the complainant. Subsequently, the transaction did not stand and three cheques issued by applicant to the complainant for the amount he owed to him, presented in the bank were dishonored, he registered present FIR against the applicant but only in respect of one dishonoured cheque. 2. Subsequently, complainant also registered FIR No.97/2024 at P.S. Korangi in respect of another cheque of Rs. 2,700,000/- in which applicant was arrested and after 27 days he was granted bail. It is reported that a civil suit between the parties on the same cause of action is also pending. Three cheques given by the applicant to the complainant were in respect of one and the same transaction. When applicant was arrested in one case, a part of the present case, and granted bail, the same principle would be applicable here. For it is not scheme of law to send a person to jail by dismissing his pre-arrest bail application and then grant him post arrest bail. 3. These arguments have been submitted by learned counsel in defence, opposed by learned counsel for complainant and learned Addl: PG Sindh. However, it is apparent that complainant Instead of registering one FIR in respect of 411 dishonored cheques has chosen to register separate FIRs in respect of each cheque against the applicant after a few months hiatus. This action of the complainant appears to be tainted with mala fide. Accordingly, this application is allowed and ad- interim-pre-arrest-bail granted to the applicant vide order dated 08.01.2024 is confirmed on same terms and conditions.