' TARIQ SHAMIM, J.---Through this single order. I propose to dispose of Crl. Misc. No,3436-B-2008 filed by Muhammad Aslam petitioner and Criminal Miscellaneous No,4509-B of 2008 filed by Bashir Ahmad petitioner, who seek post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 551 dated 6-11-2007 for offence under section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 511, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Kallur Kot, District Bhakar.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that Muhammad Aslam petitioner allegedly prepared a forged and fabricated agreement to sell in order to deprive the complainant of his valuable immovable property.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners have contended that there is delay of 11 days in lodging of the F.I.R. Which has not been explained; that Muhammad Aslam petitioner is involved by the complainant who had purchased the land in question on payment of a huge amount but since the value of the property had gone up, therefore, in order of pressurize him to pay some more money, the F.I.R. Was lodged; that a civil suit has also been filed by Muhammad Aslam petitioner for specific performance of the agreement which is pending that section 467, P.P.C. Is not attracted to the facts of the case and all the other offences do not attract the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. That Bashir Ahmad petitioner is not the beneficiary of the disputed agreement to sell; that two co- accused of the petitioners, who were attesting witnesses, were allowed bail by the learned lower Court on 15-1-2008 and that the complainant has not denied having executed the document in question, therefore, the case of petitioners is one of further inquiry.
4. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the petitions.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for parties and perused the record.
6. Insofar as Muhammad Aslam petitioner is concerned, there is ample incriminating material available on the record regarding his complicity in the crime. He is the beneficiary of the disputed document and in order to pre-empt the consequences of his illegal act, he has filed a civil suit after the F.I.R. Had been lodged. Muhammad Aslam petitioner is record-holder, as in the past also, two criminal cases were registered against him vide F.I.R. No,188 dated 10-6-2006 for offence under section 420, P.P.C. And F.I.R. No,128 dated 3-5-2006 for offence under section 379, P.P.C. During the course of investigation, he was found to be implicated by the police in the crime.
7. Insofar as Bashir Ahmad petitioner is concerned, there is no evidence of his direct involvement in the crime as he is only the scribe of the document and not the beneficiary of the disputed document prepared by Muhammad Aslam co-accused. The attesting witnesses of the document have already been allowed bail by the learned lower Court on 15-1-2008. Further the petitioner is behind the bars since 5-1-2008 and despite lapse of more than 5 months, there is no progress in the trial after submission of challan. Keeping him behind the bars, at this stage, would amount to punishing him without a trial.
8. For what has been discussed above, Criminal Miscellaneous No,3436-B of 2008 C filed by Muhammad Aslam petitioner is dismissed whereas Criminal Miscellaneous No,4509-B of 2008 filed by Bashir Ahmad is allowed and Bashir Ahmad petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.