2002 PLP 1389 (MLD)

(2) F.I.R. No. 296 dated .22‑9‑2000 under sections 188/295‑A, P.P.C Police Station City Abbottabad. (3) F.I.R. No. 273 dated 18‑10‑2001 under sections 188/153, P.P.C./16, M.P.O. Police Station City Abbottabad. (4) F. I. R. No. 278 dated 28‑10‑2001 under sections 16, M.P.O/153‑A, P.P.C. Police Station City Abbottabad, and (5) F.I.R. No. 929 dated 14‑12‑2001 under section 16, M.P.O Police Station Abbottabad.

2. The petitioner is accused of having created law and order situation arid instigated the people against the Government and the Army through his speeches delivered from time to time in different gatherings, criticising the Government and its policies.

3. The petitioner moved the applications for grant of bail before Judicial Magistrate and Sessions Judge, Abbottabad, which were declined. The petitioner has approached this Court with the similar prayer and Mr.. Fazal‑I‑Haq Abbasi Advocate for the petitioner in support of the bail applications submitted that prosecution is not in possession of any evidence to demonstrate that the petitioner has ever caused fear or alarm, acted prejudicial to the public safety or maintenance of public order or tried to create hatred among people and disaffection against the Government. Additionally, it is contended that the petitioner is not a member of any defunct organization and has no hand in activities harmful to the Government interest. Concluding the arguments, the learned counsel reiterated that the offence with which the petitioner is charged do not fall within the prohibition contained in section 497, Cr.P.C. and mere pendency of cases against the petitioner is no ground for refusal of bail. To substantiate the pleas, he placed reliance on "Mst. Zakia Begum v. District Magistrate, Charsadda" (1999 PCr. LJ I8). "Abdul Shakoor Saqi v. The State" (1998 PCr. LJ 324), "Sher Ahmed v. The State" (PLD 1993 Peshawar 104) and "Mst. Riaz Bibi v. S. H.O. , Police Station Zahirpir" (2002 PCr. LJ 530).

4. Mr. Muhammad Ayub Khan, Deputy Advocate‑General for the State, on the contrary, opposed the bail application and contended that the petitioner has been a source of trouble in the area and in view of sufficient material collected by the prosecution, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of bail. However, the learned State Counsel contended that the State will have no objection in case the petitioner is released on bail on furnishing an undertaking to the effect that in future the petitioner shall not engage himself in activities prejudicial to the country interest and creating hatred among the various sects.

5. As the F. I. Rs. lodged against the petitioner contain more or less similar allegations, all the bail applications submitted on behalf of the petitioner shall be disposed of by this single order.

6. I have heard the arguments and submissions of learned counsel for the parties in the light of the material of file and the case‑law cited at the bar.

7. It is true that the petitioner is directly nominated in the F.I.Rs. for having made derogatory and objectionable speeches against the present regime and the Pakistan Army, but it is equally true that in view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the statement of the learned Dy. A.‑G. regarding filing of an undertaking, the petitioner is entitled for concession of bail and mere pendency of other cases does not create an impediment in his way for grant of bail as held in Moulder and others v. The State (PLD 1994 SC 934), Muhammad Rafique v. The State (1997 SCMR 414), Ghulam Abbas v. The State (1997 MLD 1743) and Muhammad Ashraf v. The State (1990 ALD 635).

8. In the wake of above discussion, the application of the petitioner is accepted and he is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs. five lacs with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Ilaqa/Duty Magistrate.

9. The petitioner presently lodged in Central Jail, Haripur shall furnish an undertaking before the Superintendent Jail to the effect that in future he shall not indulge in activities prejudicial to the interest of the country and refrain from making derogatory and objectionable speeches resulting into law and order situation for the administration and creating hatred among the various sects.

10. The prosecution shall be at liberty to approach the Court concerned in case the petitioner is found misusing the concession of bail. The observations made above are tentative in nature and relate to the order in hand. NM.Q./479/P Bail allowed.