2008 PLP 1770 (YLR)

ZAFAR IQBAL CHAUDHARY, J.

Through this petition Hafeez-ul-Rehman petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 826 registered at Police Station Satokatla, Lahore on 13-10-2007 for offence under sections 365 and 452, P.P.C.

2. The prosecution's story unfolded in the F.I.R. is that the complainant was doing job in New Sitara Cloth House, Revenue Housing Society. On 5-10-2007 at about 8-30 a.m. eight persons came outside of his house from whom four were sitting in Honda City Car No.LZO-3456 and four were on two motorcycle. When they rang bell, the servant opened the door. They all intrude into the house, gave filthy abuses to the complainant, communicated threats of life to him, dragged him outside the house and forcibly put him in the car. The complainant asked them about his fault they said you should teach a lesson just now. They carried him to City Bank, Garden Town and detained him in a room at 4th floor where he was kept for four hours. Afterward the complainant was asked to return back the amount which he had taken from City Bank. The complainant said if any amount is due upon him, he may be shown bank statement but the accused were adamant to receive amount at the spot. At the refusal of the complainant the accused not only gave slaps and fist blows to him but hey also torn his clothes. The accused mistreated the complainant in a very bad manner. Amjad and Hafeez Khan were the mastermind of that occurrence. At this the manager, City Bank made a call on 15 upon which the S.H.O. of the Police Station Garden Town came at the spot and the accused handed over the complainant to him while stating that the complainant has made an attack upon the bank. The S.H.O. after hearing both the parties suggested that the parties should contact the S.H.O. of Police Station Satokatla because the matter did not happen in his territorial jurisdiction. Hence, this F.I.R.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant has become defaulter of Rs.10,74,215 whereupon the bank employees reminded him telephonically regarding his default. Upon this he reached the bank and instead of clearing his default threatened the employees of the bank on which the bank employees contacted police of Police Station Garden Town, Lahore. The police officials reached the bank and arrested him upon application submitted by the bank employees but afterwards on account of connivance of the local police he was released without registration of any criminal case against him. The complainant just to avoid from clearing his liability has pressurized the local police and manoeuvred a false story and registered this false case against the petitioner and the other bank employees as a counterblast. He further submits that according to the F.I.R. he was given severe beating but to prove this allegation no medical evidence has been produced which creates doubt that the version of the complainant is false. The bank has also filed a recovery suit against the complainant which is pending in the Banking Court, Lahore. He further submits that the petitioner is respectable and law abiding citizen of Pakistan. He is bank employee and has already joined investigation of this case and his person is no more required for the purposes of investigation to the local police.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also maintained that even if the facts of the F.I.R. are admitted to be true at this stage no offence under section 365, P.P.C. is made out and at the most section 342, P.P.C. was attracted which is bailable. So far as section 452, P.P.C. is concerned there was no occasion to enter into the house of the complainant when he had already come out of the house. In view of this according to him the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail.

5. Learned Deputy Prosecutor-General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this application on the ground that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and keeping in view the highhandedness mentioned in the F.I.R. he is not entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail.

6. After perusal of the record and hearing the learned counsel for the parties it transpired that the complainant is admittedly defaulter of the bank and it has also been brought to my notice that the complainant has not only obtained loan from the City Bank but also ten other banks have advanced him loan and the liability is still outstanding against him. According to the F.I.R. the petitioner was given severe beating and kept in illegal confinement by the petitioner and his co-accused but no medical evidence in support of this version has been produced during the investigation which makes the case of the petitioner to be one of the further inquiry. Even otherwise it is very easy to level such type of allegation but it is difficult to prove it. According to the Investigating Officer the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation as he has already joined the investigation. He is a bank employee and the controversy between the parties regarding the loan is not denied. In view of the above mala fide of the complainant being a defaulter of the bank, possibility of false implication of the petitioner in this case at this stage cannot be ruled out of consideration. Keeping in view the above situation pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to satisfaction of the learned trial Court. M.H./H-8/L Bail granted.