P L D 1994 Lahore 147 (PLP)

A case under sections 324/148/149, P.P.C. was registered with Police Station Civil Lines, Lahore on 19th of March; 1993 vide F.LR. No.78/93 on the statement of Muhammad Khan against the petitioner, Sheikh Munir Ahmed, Advocate. This application has been moved by the petitioner for his admission to pre‑arrest bail in the aforesaid case.

2. The facts, in brief, are that a house consisting of about 30 rooms, is a disputed property between the parties. The petitioner is in physical possession of 15 rooms while the remaining 15 rooms are in possession of the complainant and others. It is alleged that the petitioner issued threats with dire consequences if the complainant did not hand over the property to him. The complainant, however, did not care for the threats and refused to oblige the petitioner by vacating the house in question. On 19th of March, 1993, Sheikh Munir Ahmad armed with a .12 bore gun fired which injured Mubarik Ali on his chest, right armpit, neck and eyes. This incident was witnessed by Sarfraz Khan, Basharat and Muhammad Akram. The petitioner was given interim bail by this Court. It is contended by the learned counsel that the petitioner has been found innocent by the investigating officer and that he is a respectable member of the legal profession. He states that he is the son of a retired Judge of this Court and that he has falsely been implicated in this case on account of established enmity. According to the learned counsel, if the petitioner is arrested, he shall be subjected to humiliation in public. He has also undertaken to join the investigation proceedings as and when he is called upon to do so. Learned counsel has relied upon the rule laid down in Meeran Bux v. The State and another (PLD 1989 Supreme Court 347) in support of his case. It is argued by the learned counsel for the complainant that the petitioner is not entitled to be released on bail because recovery of gun is still to be effected from him.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also read the record with their assistance. Arif Ali S.I./Investigating Officer states emphatically before the Court that he has found the petitioner to be innocent in his investigation. He goes on to say that he was able to record the statements of as many as nine persons in support of the plea that the petitioner was not connected with the commission of the crime and that he did not fire at the complainant during the incident. The admitted position. therefore, is that the petitioner is a known respectable lawyer with 29 years standing at his credit and that he was found innocent by the police officer on the basis of evidence and affidavits sworn by as many as nine persons of the vicinity. It may also be mentioned here that Sarfraz one of the eye‑witnesses has not supported the. case of the prosecution through his affidavit. There was no complaint having been made by the complainant or the police officer that the petitioner did not join the police investigation. This being so, ad interim bail already granted to the petitioner is hereby confirmed with the condition that he would join the investigation as and when required to do so by the investigation officer. The investigation officer has been directed to complete the investigation within next fifteen days without fail. After completion of the investigation, the police officer shall send challan to the Court concerned for trial of the accused. On receipt of the challan, the competent Court shall conclude the trial within six months. With these observations, this petition is allowed. N.H.Q./M‑1291/L Interim bail confirmed.