2014 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ, J.

Petitioner Hamza Basit seeks pre-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No.343 dated 23-3-2013 registered under sections 452, 354, 337-F(i), 337-L(2) and 337A(i)/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Civil Line Gujranwala.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is an inordinate delay of four days in lodging of the F.I.R.; that no such occurrence, as narrated by the complainant in the F.I.R. ever took place, however, only hot words were exchanged between them, and the complainant with mala fide intention in connivance with the police has falsely involved him in this case. Further contends that the petitioner did not enter the house of the complainant and section 452, P.P.C. has been included just to make it a case of non-bailable offence; that as per prosecution story itself the petitioner was not armed with any weapon, therefore, nothing is required to be recovered from him; that two eye-witnesses namely Muhammad Arshad and Muhammad Qaisar are not supporting the prosecution version and that false implication of the petitioner in the circumstances cannot be ruled out. Places reliance on N.L.R 1999 Criminal 527(sic.) and 1988 PCr.LJ 270.

3. On the other hand learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant while opposing this bail petition contends that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief and cannot be granted without the proof of mala fide or malice on the part of the complainant or the police; that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. with a specific role of entering the house of the complainant, causing injuries on her person and also outraging her modesty. Further contends that during the investigation the petitioner has been found fully involved in the occurrence, therefore, he is not entitled for the confirmation of his pre-arrest bail.

4. Heard. Record perused.

5. The petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. with a specific role of not only committing house trespass but also outraging the modesty of the complainant and giving her beating. The complainant was medically examined just within two to three hours of the alleged occurrence and the medical evidence fully corroborates the version given in the F.I.R. Besides the complainant herself, one of the alleged eye-witness namely Adil Shabbir is also supporting the prosecution version. During the investigation the petitioner has been found fully involved in commission of the alleged occurrence. Most importantly, learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to establish any mala fide on the part of the complainant or the police for false implication of the petitioner in this case. In view of the above, I do not find any justifiable reason to confirm the pre-arrest bail of the petitioner, therefore, the same is dismissed and the ad-interim pre-arrest bail granted to him on 14-6-2013 is hereby recalled. The case-law relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is quite distinguishable from the facts and circumstances of this case.

6. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition. HBT/H-9/L Bail refused.