1986 PLP 1703 (MLD)

‑‑ S. 498‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.419, 420, 467, 468 & 471/109‑ Bail, grant of‑‑Mutation allegedly effected by forged sale‑deed‑‑Accused alleging to have been defrauded by co‑accused, her brother‑‑Report of Finger‑print Expert awaited‑‑No evidence so far on record to show forging or abetting forgery of sale‑deed by accused‑‑Accused a woman‑ Nothing to be recovered from her‑‑Interim pre arrest bail was confirmed in circumstances. Ch. Muhammad Aslam Chattha for Petitioner. Muhammad Sharif Butt for the State. Mst. Kaneez Fatima, petitioner, has applied for .the grant of pre‑arrest bail in a case registered against her and seven others under sections 419., 420, 467, 468,‑ 471 and 409, P.P.C. at Police Station City Sheikhupura.

2. The prosecution case is that one Sardar Khan had two wives, namely, Ghulam Fatima and Mst. Barkat Bibi complainant. The petitioner is the daughter of said Sardar Khan from Mst. Ghulam Fatima. Muhammad Aslam, Rehmat Ali and Ghulam Rasul are the real brothers of the petitioner and all are accused in this case. Wt. Balqees, Bibi, Mst. Rashida Bibi, Mst. Saleem Bibi, Mst. Azra Bibi, Mst. Zahida Bibi and Muhammad Akram are daughters and son of the complainant from Sardar Khan. According to her (complainant) after Sardar Khan died mutation of inheritance was entered and they were allocated share in land according to Shariat It is stated by Mst. Barkat Bibi, complainant, that Muhammad Akram, her son was murdered on .13‑6‑1985, therefore, she contacted the Patwari for getting the land of Muhammad Akram deceased (inherited by him from his father Sardar Khan) mutated in the names of his children and learnt that the land inherited by her and her children had been fraudulently got transferred by Muhammad Aslam, Rehmat Ali, Ghulam Rasul and Mst. Kaneez Fstima petitioner in their own names since 20‑8‑1980 on the basis of forg,sd sale‑deed. According to her the forged deed was got registered by the accused by producing fictitious ladies in place of the complainant and her daughters before the Registrar.

3. Muhammad Akbar A. S.1, states that sample papers of the accused persons including that of the petitioner have been obtained and are being sent to the Finger Print Expert alongwith the alleged forged registered deed for comparison and report.

4. The petitioner's case is that she has also been defrauded by her real brother Muhammad Aslam accused because her landed property has also been got transferred by him illegally in his own name and that she is not party to the forgery of any sale‑deed. Since the report of Finger Print Expert is awaited, therefore, material so far brought on reco;d does not, show that she had forged or abetted the foreign of the disputed sale deed. She is a woman Nothing is to be recovered from her. For all these reasons, I feel inclined to confirm the interim pre‑arrest bail already granted to the 'petitioner on 12‑7‑1986. Order accordingly. S.A Petition accepted.