' M. BILAL KHAN, J.--- Ch. Javaid .Riaz son of Yousaf Ali, the petitioner, who stands involved in case F.I.R. No,359, dated 6-12-2001, registered with Police Station Pir Mehal, District Toba Tek Singh for offences under sections 302, 148, 149 read with section 109, P.P.C. At the instance of Muhammad Shafiq (complainant), son of Haji Muhammad Bashir deceased, by filing the instant petition seeks post-arrest bail.
2. Precisely the facts giving rise to this petition were that Muhammad Shafiq (complainant) got the aforesaid case registered for the murder of his father Haji Muhammad Bashir against unknown persons; so many persons had been interrogated, however, on 1-10-2003, one Ghulam Abbas, who had been arrested in case/F.I.R. No,387, dated 2-6-2003, registered with Police Station Sanda, Lahore, and during the course of investigation, had made a disclosure about his involvement in the instant case along with his co-accused, whereupon he was got transferred to Toba Tek Singh, where his statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Was got recorded, wherein he besides himself had nominated Haji Muhammad, Manzoor, Sada Bahar, Ghulam Shabbir, Muhammad Asif and Muhammad Saeed. The said Ghulam Abbas had also stated that he had committed the crime of murder of Haji Muhammad Bashir on the instigation of the petitioner. Faced with this situation, the petitioner had sought pre-arrest bail from the Court of Session at Karnalia and interim anticipatory bail was allowed to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamalia on 1-11-2003, but the said application had been withdrawn on 21-11-2003; thereafter finding the petitioner to be guilty during the course of investigation, the police submitted challan before the Court on 22-10-2003, wherein he had been summoned to face trial, but he failed to appear before the learned trial Court and had been declared proclaimed offender on 18-11-2003; after having been arrested in execution of warrants of arrest on 1-4-2004, he preferred his application for post-arrest bail, which was allowed by the learned Additior al Sessions Judge, Kamalia on 11-5-2004; feeling aggrieved of the said order, the complainant had approached this Court for recall thereof by means of Criminal miscellaneous No,4353/CB of 2004 and this Court vide order, dated 4-10-2004 while accepting the said petition had proceeded to recall the concession of bail allowed to the petitioner, however, the petitioner failed to surrender himself before the authorities; thereafter in the year 2006, he had approached the Court of Session for his pre-arrest bail, but his plea had been turned down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Kamalia vide order, dated 18-10-2006; then he preferred his application before this Court for the said relief, but this Court vide order, dated 2-11-2006 only allowed him protective bail and directed him to approach the Court of first instance; he after having failed to procure-pre-arrest bail on 19-12-2006, moved an application for post-arrest bail, but the said application also failed on 11-1-2007. Hence, the instant petition.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties as also the learned Additional Prosecutor- General Punjab for the State and going through the record brought by Shahid Altaf, A.S.-I., it has been observed that the petitioner had remained absconder from 4-10-2004, when concession of bail allowed to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamalia was recalled, and had surrendered before this Court only on 2-11-2006. He was arrested by the police, when his plea for pre-arrest bail was turned down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamalia on 19-12-2006.
It is also pertinent to mention here that during the period of his abscondence, trial had commenced and the co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Ghulam Shabbir, Asghar Ali, Haji Muhammad, Sadda Bahar, Manzoor and Muhammad Saeed, who had faced the trial, had earned acquittal from the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamalia vide his judgment dated 21- 12-2005. It was thereafter when the petitioner had presented himself before the Court of Session at Kamalia by moving for pre-arrest bail, but it appears that he had failed to appear before the Court on 18-10-2006, when his application was dismissed. Thereafter, he had approached this Court for the said relief and this Court vide order 2-11-2006, as aforementioned, had allowed him protective bail to put forward his point of view before the Court of Session. It was only on 19-12-2006, that he was arrested after refusal of relief of pre-arrest bail. During this period, he has been playing fast and loose with the process of law. The learned trial Judge while refusing relief of post-arrest bail to the petitioner vide the impugned order has rightly observed that allowing concession of bail to a wilful absconder would create a sense of insecurity among the people and disturbance in the society. It is now well-settled that a fugitive from law loses some of his normal rights available to him under procedural and substantive law and that noticeable abscondance disentitles him to concession of bail notwithstanding the fact that his co-accused had earned acquittal. It is established principle of law that the evidence recorded in the absence of an accused could not be used against him and fate of such an accused is to be decided on evidence recorded in his presence. Even otherwise, post-arrest bail allowed to the petitioner by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamalia was cancelled by this Court after considering the allegations brought against him and that order still holds D the field. Keeping in view the facts of the case and the conduct of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail. Accordingly, this petition being meritless stands dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.