2013 PLP 833 (MLD)

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.

Through this petition under section 498, Cr.P.C. Ehsan petitioner has sought bail before arrest in case F.I.R. No. 364/12, dated 24-10-2012 registered at Police Station Mian Gondal, District Mandi Bahauddin in respect of offences under sections 302/324/148/149/109, P.P.C.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent and he has been involved in this case by the complainant with mala fide intention and ulterior motive by widening the net. The petitioner has been involved in this case because he is father of the main accused otherwise no overt act is attributed to him during the occurrence. The petitioner is only attributed a lalkara which is very easy to allege and very difficult to prove. The petitioner is a man of advanced age and he is previous non-convict. No useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars at this stage.

3. On the other hand the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant after going through the record contends that the petitioner is named in the promptly lodged F.I.R. and specific role of a commanding lalkara is attributed to him which prompted his co-accused to take life of deceased and caused injuries to the injured victim. Recovery is yet to be effected. During the investigation the investigating officer has collected eleven empties of gun .12 bore from the spot. The investigating officer also found the petitioner to be involved in this case. The petitioner is a member of unlawful assembly and it is settled law that a member of an unlawful assembly is equally responsible for the act and omission of his co-accused. The statement of the injured victim under section 161, Cr.P.C. is on record who is fully involving the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence. There is absolutely no mala fide on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioner in this case which is a pre-requisite for grant of pre-arrest bail. The offence with which the petitioner is charged falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed by this Court that this is bail before arrest and only tentative assessment is required at this stage. Admittedly the petitioner is not attributed any injury to the deceased or to injured person and he has been attributed only a lalkara. The petitioner is father of main accused, the complainant has involved as many as seven persons in this case, therefore, possibility cannot be ruled out of consideration that the complainant has spread the net wide to entangle maximum person from the petitioner's side. Although the petitioner was alleged armed with gun .12 bore but admittedly he did not use the same for causing injury to anybody in spite of having ample opportunity. A gun .12 bore has already been recovered from co-accused. Both the parties are known to each other and if one party resort to violence the other could also involve the head of opposite party. The petitioner is previous non-convict, never involved in any other case of such nature, statedly he is sixty years of age, investigation qua the petitioner is complete, therefore, sending him behind the bars at this stage would not serve any beneficial purpose.

5. For what has been discussed above this petition is, therefore, allowed and the ad interim-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner vide order dated 21-12-2012 is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing of fresh bail bond by the petitioner in the sum of Rs.100,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. MWA/E-2/L Bail confirmed.