' IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- Through this application under section 498, Cr.P.C. Muhammad Tariq and Mahabat, petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No, 272-2007, dated 21-4-2007, registered under sections 324, 379, 354, 337-F(i), 148/149, P.P.C. At Police Station Saddar Pakpattan Sharif on the application of Shah Din, the complainant.
2. The brief allegation against the Petitioner is that he long with his co-accused attacked on the complainant party as a result of which Nadeem was injured and modesty of Mst. Gulzaran Bibi was also outraged.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that Muhammad Zafar, father of Muhammad Tariq, Petitioner No,1 earlier filed a civil suit against Mst. Gulzaran Bibi, etc. In which status quo order has been passed in favour of the petitioners; that the petitioners are in possession of the disputed land and the present case has been got registered against the petitioners only to restrain them from pursuing the civil suit and criminal litigation is also pending between the parties; that the petitioners have moved an application for re-examination of the injured P.Ws. And medical hoard has been constituted in this regard and the observation of the medical board will be received by tomorrow that no case under section 354, P.P.C. Has been made out against the petitioner because no incident had taken place for outraging the modesty of Mst. Gulzaran Bibi, 4.The learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this bail petition on the ground that civil litigation is pending between the parties regarding the same land; that the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. And case against them is made out; that is not a fit case for the confirmation of pre- arrest bail as there is no mala fide on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioners in the present case; that weapons of offence are yet to be recovered from the petitioners; that earlier the petitioners had also tried to take possession of the disputed land for 3/4 times and the petitioners are also involved in 3/4 other criminal cases.
5. The learned Additional Prosecutor General has also opposed this bail petition.
6. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due care and caution.
7. Admittedly, both the parties are involved in criminal and civil litigation and claim of the complainant is that the accused party had come to the spot and made firing upon them. During the incident Muhammad Nadeem, injured received firearm injury on his left leg, which is attributed to Mahabat (Petitioner No,2) and the same is borne out from the medico legal report. He has failed A to show any mala fide on the part of the complainant or the police for falsely attributing this injury to him and the offence under section 324, P.P.C. Is prima facie made out which falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Hence, this bail application to the extent of Mahabat (Petitioner No,2) is hereby dismissed.
8. As far as Muhammad Tariq (Petitioner No,1) is concerned, only role of ineffective firing was attributed to him and no empty has been recovered from the spot in spite of the fact that seven persons were alleged to have made firing during the incident. The chances of false involvement of the petitioner in the present case by the B complainant with mala fide intention and ulterior motive cannot be ruled out by widening the net as the civil and criminal litigation is pending between the parties. The role 'attributed to Muhammad Tariq petitioner is not supported by any connecting evidence. The petitioner cannot be sent behind the bars merely for the reason that weapon of offence is to be recovered from him, which will not advance the prosecution case any further as no empty was recovered from the spot. Now, it is well settled law that pre-arrest bail can be granted, if the accused succeeds in making out a case of further inquiry.
' For the foregoing reason, the instant bail petition is accepted to the extent of Muhammad Tariq (Petitioner No,1) and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to him by this Court vide order dated 4-6-2007, is hereby confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Illaqa/Judicial Magistrate.