2025 P Cr (PLP)

Crl. Misc. No. 01 of 2024 Ali Zia Bajwa, J.

Through this miscellaneous application, the applicants intend to place on the record certain documents. The same is allowed subject to all just and legal exceptions. Main Case Through this petition filed under Section 498 Cr.P.C., the petitioners seek their pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.702/2024, dated 01.09.2024, offences under Sections 452, 354, 337-F(i), 337-L2, 147, 148 and 149 P.P.C registered with Police Station Dinga, District Gujrat.

2. The allegation against the petitioners, as detailed in the crime report, is that on 16.08.2024, at 8:00 p.m., they, along with their co-accused, armed with weapons and acting in furtherance of a common object, unlawfully trespassed into the complainant's house, assaulted her family, and inflicted injuries on Nazir Begum (the complainant), her husband Akbar Ali, and her son Muhammad Afzal.

3. The arguments have been heard, and the record has been thoroughly examined.

4. At the very outset, the Investigating Officer present in Court states that the arrest of Amir Raza (petitioner No.3) is not required. In light of this, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press this petition with respect to petitioner No.3. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn to his extent, and the ad-interim pre-arrest bail previously granted to the said petitioner is hereby recalled.

5. This Court has observed that petitioners Nos.1 and 2 are explicitly named in the FIR. According to the crime report, petitioner No.1, armed with a pistol, and petitioner No.2, armed with a hatchet, along with their co-accused, unlawfully trespassed into the house of the complainant. Petitioner No.1 is specifically accused of delivering a punch to the complainant's face, while the collective role of assaulting Muhammad Afzal and Akbar Ali has been attributed to the remaining accused individuals. The injured individuals underwent medical examination, and their injuries were classified by the doctors as punishable under Sections 337-F(i) and 337-L2 of the P.P.C. Additionally, the offence under Section 452 of the P.P.C is non-bailable. During the investigation, both petitioners were found to be implicated in the crime. The petitioners have failed to demonstrate any malice or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant or the investigating agency to falsely implicate them in this case. Furthermore, the recovery of the weapons used in the offence remains pending and is to be effected based on the information provided by petitioners Nos.1 and 2.

6. The petitioners have annexed the Medico-Legal Certificate (MLC) of Muhammad Afzal son of Muhammad Sultan Khan, with this petition. Highlighting this document, the petitioners' counsel contended that while the alleged incident is claimed to have occurred on 16.08.2024, the injured was medically examined on 31.05.2024 several months prior to the alleged occurrence. This glaring inconsistency casts serious doubt on the prosecution's case, suggesting malice and bad faith. When confronted, the learned Law Officer, assisted by the complainant's counsel, informed the Court that Muhammad Afzal was medically examined on the same day of the incident. The MLC appended to the bail petition is completely extraneous to this case and in fact, pertains to a different individual named Afzal with distinct parentage, rendering it irrelevant and misleading. Upon being confronted, the counsel for the petitioners clarified that the MLC had been furnished by the petitioners and was appended to the bail petition without prior verification, candidly admitting the lapse in due diligence during its submission.

7. It is worth emphasizing that an advocate has a critical duty to ensure that the documents appended with a petition are relevant, authentic, and accurate. Presenting irrelevant or forged documents to the Court is not only against legal ethics but also a violation of professional responsibility. It can mislead the Court, cause unnecessary delays, and undermine the integrity of the judicial process. The integrity of the legal process also relies on the diligence and vigilance of an advocate as an officer of the Court. An advocate is duty-bound to present true facts and authentic documents, ensuring the judicial process remains beyond reproach.

8. To avoid such predicaments, an advocate must remain vigilant and discerning, embodying the acumen and professionalism befitting one well-versed in the law. Any such negligence cannot simply be brushed aside with the excuse that an erroneous document was supplied by his client. An advocate must uphold his duty to scrutinize and verify all submissions with firm diligence. Deliberate misrepresentation of facts by an advocate constitutes professional misconduct, inviting severe legal repercussions and strict action, as it undermines judicial integrity and violates the trust vested in the legal profession. The reliance can be placed on the landmark judgment cited as The State Through Advocate-General, N.W.F.P. v. Zubair and 4 others PLD 1986 SC 173.

9. It is pertinent to note that the scope of pre-arrest bail is confined to exceptional and rare circumstances. Such relief is granted only in cases where it is evident that the registration of the case stems from enmity or mala fides, or where no offence is prima facie established on the record. After thoroughly examining the material on the record, this Court finds no justification for granting the extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail to petitioners Nos.1 and 2, particularly in light of their submission of an irrelevant MLC in an apparent attempt to mislead the Court.

10. Consequently, the petition at hand, insofar as it pertains to petitioners Nos.1 and 2, is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. The order granting ad-interim pre-arrest bail to the said petitioners is accordingly recalled. MH/I-1/L Petition dismissed.