Seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No, 452/04 dated 24.4.2004 for the offences under Sections 458/365/335/337-L(ii)/148/149/109 PPC registered at P.S. Saddar Faisalabad on the grounds that the story narrated in the application under Section 22-A Cr.P.C. moved before the Sessions Judge in entirely different then the fact narrated in the FIR; during the investigation complainant of this case alongwith injured witness have sworn affidavits stating therein that Riaz Ahmad-who has been shown as main culprit in the FIR, had not participated in the occurrence; that on the night between 24/25.12.2003 petitioners were on Church duty and in support of his arguments a certified copy of rapt has been placed on the record by the learned counsel, statedly the staff of Church has also filed affidavits stating therein that the petitioners were on duty at Church at the time of occurrence; that during the investigation offences under Sections 458/365/ 335/354 PPC were deleted by the investigating agency and against this finding of the agency Writ Petition No, 13364/04 (Faizur Rehman vs. I.G. ,Police etc.) was filed but the same was dismissed for non prosecution. It is submitted that the remaining offence i,e, under Section 337-L (ii) PPC is bailable whereas Section 156 (A)(C) and (D) of Police Order 2002 do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C; that petitioners are no more required for any further investigation; the petitioners are government officials and there is no apprehension of their abscondence.
2. On the other hand learned Law Officer after going through the record submits that initially the matter was inquired into by the ASP concerned. Under the orders of DIG Faisalabad and all the petitioners were found guilty and present case was registered. DSP Range Crimes Faisalabad also conducted the investigation and found the petitioners responsible for the commission of offence.
Thereafter the matter was transferred to DSP Imtiaz Cheema who during the investigation came to the conclusion that the offences under Sections 365/335/458 PPC are not made out and directed for submission of challan only under Section 337-L(ii)(v) PPC read with Section 156(A)(C)(D) Police Act, 2002. Learned Law Officer further submits that this case was registered on 24.4.2004 and for the first time petitioners moved application for the grant of pre-arrest bail on 23.2.2005, after obtaining affidavits from the complainant side wherein the witnesses have exonerated the petitioners; it is submitted that this conduct of petitioners itself is sufficient to show the malafide of the petitioners and disentitled them to the concession of bail.
3. Heard. File perused.
4. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that one Faizur Rehman son of Muhammad Sharif filed an application before the police for registration of case alleging therein that on the night falling between 25 and 26 December, 2003 Ayaz Ahmed SI, Abdul Shakoor, Muhammad Afzal Muhammad Arshad Constables, Asif s/o Ghulam Jillani and Sarwar s/o Sheema launched attack on his house when he was sleeping and intruded into the house by scaling over the wall. They apprehended and tortured him. They searched the rooms of his house, abused the ladies of the house and took Rs, 10,000/- as well as ornaments of gold from the house. They also took Habib-ur- Rehman, brother of the complainant with the intention to abduct him; that the accused also intruded into other houses of the village and also took Bisharat Ali, Wazir, Sadaqat, Ehsan and Shehzad with them and wisked away to some unknown place. That on the next morning the PWs reached at Police Post Samanabad and saw the accused torturing Habib-ur-Rehman there.
The record produced before this Court reveals that during the investigation/inquiry conducted by DSP Range Crimes Faisalabad and ASP Saddar Faisalabad, petitioners were found guilty. The opinion of both the investigating officers is that petitioners are very much involved in this case. The record of this case also reveals that the petitioners never bothered to get the protection of law for almost one year but succeeded in obtaining the affidavits of prosecution witnesses wherein they have exonerated the accused. Thereafter they moved application before Sessions Court for the grant of pre-arrest bail but the same relief was denied and the impugned order passed. The conduct of petitioners itself show that they being police official are in a position to temper with the prosecution evidence.
The duty of the police officer is to protect life, honour and property of the citizen and not to loot them. The facts narrated in the FIR are sufficient to show that the petitioners and their co-accused are involved in the commission of offence in which innocent citizen have been deprived of their such rights liberties. The statements of witnesses recorded during the 3 investigation clearly show that accused while trespassing into their house, illegally searched the house, abused the ladies, illegally detained the PWs at the Police Post as well and taken away the belongings of the complainant party during the illegal search of the house. Learned counsel for die petitioners has failed to show any malafide on the part of complainant/prosecution agency qua the false involvement of the petitioners. It is also apparent from the record that all of the prosecution witnesses have not pardoned the petitioners. Thus the stand of learned counsel with regard to the compromise of the parties also stands belied by the data available on the record. No ground for grant of pre-arrest bail is made out. This petition having no merits stands dismissed.