' TANVIR BASHIR ANSARI, J.-Nazar Hussain accused in F.I.R. No,235/2001 registered under section 337- P.P.C. Has moved a pre-arrest bail application before the learned Sessions Judge, Lahore. The bail application was rejected by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge on 26-5-2001. He then filed a pre- arrest bail application bearing Crl.Misc.No,3483- B/2001 wherein on 26-6-2001 ad interim pre-arrest bail was granted to the said Nazar Hussain uptil 4-7-2001. The said Nazar Hussain after obtaining a certificate from learned counsel affirming the grant of pre-arrest bail went to his house for arranging the surety bonds as ordered.
2. While the said accused was in his house, Muhammad Ashiq, ASI appellant conducted a raid and arrested Nazar Hussain accused. It was urged that the said accused was granted interim bail by this court in support of which the certificate of the learned counsel was also produced but despite this, the ASI concerned did not pay any heed to the plea of the accused.
3. Crl. Original No,44/2001 was filed by Abdul Hamid and Nazar Hussain wherein Mian Liaquat S.H.O.
And Ashiq Ali A.S.-I P.S. Shandara Town, Lahore were arrayed as respondents/contemners.
Respondent No,2 namely Ashiq Ali ASI submitted his reply to the Crl. Org. Wherein he admitted that he was informed by the aggrieved partly that Nazar Hussain was present at Haji Kot whereupon the said ASI reached the spot along with other police officials and put the said accused under arrest and confined him in the police lock up. The plea *of the A.S.-I. Was that neither the accused Nazar Hussain nor his learned counsel were able to produce any copy of the bail order granting by this Court and that the act of the such police officials was not in violation of any order passed by this Court.
4. After hearing the parties, the learned Single Judge of this Court convicted and sentenced Ashiq Hussain ASI appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months with a fine of Rs,5,000 and to further undergo SI for 15 days in default thereof vide order dated 11-2-2002.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant was not warranted in the circumstances of the case as the appellant had acted in performance of his duties. Further submits that at no stage, did the accused Nazar Hussain or his counsel produced the copy of the order passed by this Court whereby pre-arrest bail was allowed to Nazar Hussain. Also submits that the conduct of the accused was very objectionable as he remained an absconder for almost one month after his pre-arrest bail was rejected by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge. Contends that in the absence of the production of a copy of the ing order to the appellant, the appellant who was informed by the aggrieved party (complainant) that Nazar Hussain accused was present at Haji Kot, the appellant acted in good faith in effecting the arrest of the said accused.
6. On the other hand, it is strongly contended that the accused had surrendered himself before this Court while praying for pre-arrest bail which was allowed to him vide order dated 26-6-2001. It was on account of paucity of time that he could not obtain the certified copy of the aforesaid order and instead obtained a certificate from his learned counsel to this effect. At the time when the appellant came to arrest the accused, it was vehemently urged before him that the accused had been granted bail but this plea of the accused was disregarded most contemptuously by the appellant.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. It is not denied that the accused Nazar Hussain was granted ad interim pre-arrest bail on 26-6-2001. It is also on the record that the arrest of the accused was made by the appellant on the same day at about 1-00 p.m. It neither appears reasonable nor probable to believe that the accused did not inform the appellant about his pre- arrest bail it the time when the appellant came to arrest him. The appellant should have given due consideration to this plea of the accused Nazar Hussain particularly when he had also produced the certificate issued by his learned counsel to this effect.
8. We do not find any substance in this appeal which is hereby dismissed. However, keeping in mind the submission made on behalf of the appellant that it was full month after the rejection of the bail of the accused Nazar Hussajn that he was reported to be present at Haji Kot that the appellant promptly proceeded to the spot and caused the arrest of the accused so that he is not .Able to flee from law once again. We are inclined to reduce the sentence from 3 months' S.l. To 2 months' The sentence regarding fine and/or imprisonment in lieu thereof shall remain intact.
Sentence reduced.