2011 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ, J.

Through this petition Akbar Ali, petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 554, dated 1-5-2010, registered at Police Station North Cantt. Lahore in respect of offences under sections 420, 468 and 471, P.P.C.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent, he has not committed any crime and has falsely been involved in this case due to mala fide intention of the complainant; that Power of Attorney mentioned in the F.I.R. is a registered document and presumption of truth is attached with the same; that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser of property from the legal heirs of Himmat Khan and huge amqunts have been paid to them by the petitioner, therefore, sections 420, 468 and 471, P.P.C. do not attract in this case; that the offences against the petitioner do not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr. P. C. and in fact the complainant party has committed fraud with the petitioner.

3. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant vehemently contesting this bail application maintains that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief and deeper appreciation of the merits of the case at this stage is not proper; that offence against the petitioner is proved on the record as some of the executants shown in the Power of Attorney, subject-matter of the F.I.R., were not even present in Pakistan when this forged and fake Power of Attorney has been executed; and that the petitioner has committed a heinous offence, hence, he is not entitled for extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail.

4. Heard. Record perused.

5. Petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. with specific allegation of committing fraud with the complainant and that of preparing a forged Power of Attorney regarding a huge property in his favour. Statement of Muhammad Zul-Kufal son of Himmat Khan recorded by Investigating Officer shows that Power of Attorney mentioned in the F.I.R. was never executed by him or even by his mother and sisters. During the investigation, it has also been transpired that Mst. Durr-e-Shehwar and Mst. Naila, two alleged executants of Power of Attorney reside abroad and they have not even visited Pakistan for the last about ten years. Many agreements referred by the learned counsel for the petitioner showing money transactions between the parties cannot be considered at this stage, as that amounts to the deeper appreciation of the controversy between the parties. Here, I respectfully refer an observation of Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Syed Lakhat-e-Hussnain v. State (2010 SCMR 855):- "We are not likely to make any comments on the authenticity of the documents placed on record, as at the first instance it is for the trial Court after recording of evidence to determine the authenticity of the same, Court had only to see whether accused was connected with the commission of crime or not and for that purpose, only tentative assessment of evidence was to be made and deeper appreciation of evidence and circumstances appearing in the case were neither desirable nor permissible at bail stage." The petitioner is unable to point out any mala fide or ulterior motive on the part of the complainant or the police for his false involvement in this case. There is sufficient incriminating material available on the record showing prima facie culpability of the petitioner in the alleged crime; hence, petitioner is not entitled to the extra ordinary relief of pre-arrest bail.

6. This petition is, therefore, dismissed and ad interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioner by this Court vide order dated 20-9-2010 is hereby recalled.

7. It is, however, clarified that observations made herein above are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition. N.H.Q./A-244/L Pre-arrest bail refused.