' The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.330 of 2004 registered in Police Station, Kahna, District Lahore under sections 420, 468, 471 and 506, P.P. C .
2. The F.I.R. Was lodged by Saleem Akhtar Bhatti, complainant, resident of 12-Canal Park, Gulberg-II, Lahore stating therein that he had set up a Housing Scheme in the name of Ahmadpur Housing Scheme. One Muhammad Saleem used to work with him previously as salesman. He obtained a stay order against him from the learned Civil Court at Lahore. During the pendency of the said case Qaisar Rafiq accused told them that if they made a statement in the Court that in case Muhammad Saleem alias Major sells the land, Sajjad and he i.e. The complainant will have no objection and in this way, the stay order issued by the Court will come to an end. In this way the accused got prepared a fictitious agreement to sell on his behalf in favour of Sajjad Hussain. He also prepared a forged receipt regarding the payment of Rs.2,500,000 on behalf of Sajjad Hussain.
On the basis of those forged/fictitious documents the accused later on tried to occupy the land of his Housing Scheme and also indulged in firing. They also issued threats that in case possession of the land was not handed over to them, they will kill them. The occurrence which had taken place on the night between 5/6 May, 2004 was witnessed by Riaz and Zulfiqar P.Ws.
3. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
4. It appears from record that the case was investigated by the S.P.-CRO, Lahore and the accused petitioners joined the investigation. As a result of thorough investigation he observed that the complainant party was unable to produce any solid evidence about the commission of offence of forgery by the accused. He did not agree with the story narrated in the F.I.R. He came to the conclusion that the complainant party had failed to prove its version as contained in the F.I.R.
Hence it was directed by him that a report be prepared for the cancellation of case. He further directed that a final report in the matter be sent to the Capital City Police Officer.
' It may be mentioned here that the learned counsel for the petitioners addressed his arguments on 17-9-2004 but the learned counsel for the complainant requested for adjournment and it was on his request that the proceedings were adjourned till tomorrow but yesterday or even today the learned counsel for the complainant has failed to put in appearance. As mentioned above, it appears that as a result of investigation the complainant part was unable to prove any evidence before the Investigating Officer in support of its version and hence the S.P.-CRO who was investigating the case has issued instructions for preparation of report for cancellation of the case.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has asserted that the case .Against the petitioners was without any basis and that they have been falsely implicated in this case by the complainant party with mala fide intention and with ulterior motives.
5. In view of what has been stated above, the petitioners are clearly entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail. Therefore, this bail application is accepted and the interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners Muhammad Munk, Asad Bashir and Amir Ali Shahzad is hereby confirmed, subject to their furnishing fresh. Bail bonds in the sum of Rs.35,000, with one surety each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, within seven days.