2008 PLP 1089 (YLR)

KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, in support of this bail cancellation petition filed against the respondents, contends that both the respondents are named in the F.I.R. who played a fraud with the petitioner in connivance with Akbar Khan, a real brother of respondent Anwar Khan and maternal uncle of respondent Ali Sufiyan; that they were the persons who took the complainant to the land which was neither in their possession nor they had any Power of Attorney qua the same; that considerations for the grant of bail before arrest and bail after arrest are altogether different and that it is a fit case for recall of pre-arrest bail of the respondents.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the fraud, if any, has been committed by Akbar Khan, a real brother of respondent Anwar. Khan and maternal uncle of respondent Ali Sufiyan; that the respondents have falsely been implicated in this case; that the respondents are not even witnesses to the said agreement; that the complainant has changed the second page of the sale agreement; that after getting money the said Akbar Khan had handed over possession of the said land to the complainant who later on delivered its possession to the Punjab Support Board and that the respondents were rightly granted pre-arrest bail in this case.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The said Akbar Khan was allowed interim bail before arrest by this Court on 20-6-2006 till 27-6-2006 on which date Akbar was present along with his Advocate Rana Muhammad Anwar but the record was not available, a direction was given to the learned State counsel for production of record on 28-6-2006 on which date neither the said Akbar nor his learned counsel Mirza Azizur Rehman or Rana Muhammad Anwar, Advocate were present, even no information qua absence was laid before this Court and consequently criminal Miscellaneous No.4934-B of 2006 was dismissed and initiation of proceedings under section 514, Cr.P.C. were directed to be initiated against the sureties.

4. The case was registered on 11-11-2005, the case was investigated by Muhammad Arif S.-I. while according to the present Investigating Officer, namely, Abdul Habib S.-I. present in Court, the investigation of this .case entrusted to him on 7-9-2006 while the earlier Investigating Officer has been transferred to Police Station Satokatla. This Court is unable to understand that about an year has passed, Akbar accused is still at large, no proceedings under sections 87/88, Cr.P.C. were initiated against him either by the present Investigating Officer or the earlier one.

5. In view of the above, the learned Additional Advocate-General Punjab Ch. Muhammad Hanif Khatana has been asked to direct the S.P. (Investigation) concerned to take necessary legal and departmental action the delinquent police officers under intimation to this Bench through Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.

6. As has been discussed above, the conduct of co-accused Akbar Khan is that he is playing hide and seek with the Courts of law. As far as case of the present petitioners is concerned, I may observe here that the respondents are named in the F.I.R. It is pertinent to mention here that Akbar Khan is a real brother of respondent Anwar Khan while maternal uncle of respondent Ali Sufiyan. Ali Sufiyan respondent was employee of the complainant. It was he who introduced Akbar Khan and Anwar Khan to the complainant and convinced the complainant to purchase the land in question which land, later on, was not found to be present in the Revenue Record. Prima' facie, it were the respondents who, in connivance with co-accused Akbar, defrauded the complainant of the huge amount. Considerations for the grant of bail before arrest and bail after arrest and altogether different and even ingredients for the grant of bail before arrest are very much lacking in this case, so, I am of the prima face view that the respondents were wrongly extended the extraordinary concession of pre-arrest bail. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the pre-arrest bail allowed to the respondents is hereby cancelled. H.B.T./B-5/L Bail cancelled.