' MUHAMMAD SAIR ALI, J. ---F .I.R. No,24 dated 10-1-2009 was registered at Police Station, Township, Lahore for the offences under sections 420,468,471, P.P.C., on application of Ch. Sadaqat Ali son of Barkat Ali. It was alleged therein that the complainant entered into agreement for purchase of land from Muhammad Ashiq son of Siraj Din. On whose refusal to get sale-deed registered, a suit for specific performance of the agreement was filed by the complainant against him. On conceding statement of said Muhammad Ashiq, the suit was decreed through judgment and decree dated 31-1-2001 by the learned Civil Judge, Lahore. The complainant claims that hg recently came to know that some persons including petitioner in connivance with Muhammad Ashiq got the land transferred in their names and were trying to take possession thereof. On registration of the F.I.R., petitioner applied for pre-arrest bail which was declined by the learned Sessions Judge, Lahore through order dated 5-5-2009. Petitioner thereupon filed bail before arrest before. The Lahore High Court, Lahore vide Criminal Miscellaneous No, 5436-B of 2009. This petition was also dismissed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore through order dated 5-6-2009. Hence the present petition for leave to appeal.
2. On 28-7-2002 notice was ordered to the complainant for 31-7-2009 and interim pre-arrest bail was allowed to the petitioner. On 31-7-2009, this Court ordered fresh notices to the complainant for 12-8-2009 i,e, today.
3. Mr. Abdul Ghaffar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nadeem-ud-Din Malik, Advocate Supreme Court for the complainant and. Mr. Shabbir Lali, Addl. Prosecutor-General have been heard. Record examined. It has not been denied that on 31-1-2001 complainant Ch. Sadaqat Ali obtained decree in his favour on concession of Muhammad Ashiq to the extent of his .Share. The co-owner thereof made no such concession in favour of Sadaqat Ali. The co-owner's Civil Revision is stated to be pending before the High Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the complainant neither filed any execution petition for decree dated 31-1-2001 nor did he obtain registration of the sale-deed thereupon in his favour. Learned counsel for the complainant explained that complainant's inaction was caused by co-owner's litigation, wherefore neither decree dated 31-1-2001 could be executed nor a sale deed could be registered.
5. In the meanwhile through a registered sale-deed (Document No,437) of 2006, Muhammad Ashiq sold the said land to Kashif Ali son of Ch. Sadaqat Ali. Mutation of entries was also made thereupon.
Out of the above transferred/mutated land, petitioner purchased 5 marlas of land through registered sale-deed dated 22-11-2007. This transaction was also stated to have been entered in the mutation register.
6. As per record here along placed, it appears that on 6-4-2008 complainant Sadaqat Ali filed Civil Suit No,426 of 2001 against 14 defendants including the petitioner claiming declaration and perpetual injunction. On 26-4-2006, the learned Civil Judge, Lahore granted a temporary injunction but also nominated local commissioner to report regarding possession and construction over the suit property. Intriguingly, on complainant's application, the order for appointment of local commissioner was revoked on 10-5-2008 by the learned Civil Judge. The complainant un- conditionally withdrew the suit on the ground that the parties had entered into a compromise and the learned Civil Judge, Lahore dismissed the suit as withdrawn.
7. It was during the pendency of the above suit that this F.I.R. Was registered on 10-1-2009. The parties and subject matter of the suit and the complainant in the F.I.R. Are the same. In the F.I.R., complainant withheld information of filing of the suit dated 6-4-2008 and issuance of a temporary injunction therein. It is strange that the complainant on F.I.R. Dated 10-1-2009, unconditionally withdrew his suit on 22-1-2009 (12 days after the F.I.R.) by alleging a compromise between the parties. In his application for the suit withdrawal, the complainant again concealed the factum of registration of F.I.R. From the learned Civil Court. The suit was filed in April, 2008 while F.I.R. Was registered after a month in January, 2009. The delay in filing F.I:R. And sudden withdrawal of the suit, have remained unexplained. Complainant's conduct thus raises many un-answered questions.
8. Petitioner claims to be a bona fide purchaser without notice of the decree, for value from Kashif Ali, who purchased the said land per his registered sale deed from Muhammad Ashiq. Contrarily, the complainant bases his claim to land on an unexecuted decree in 2001 in his favour. In absence of either execution/registration of the said decree or that of a sale deed, the complainant's claim to ownership will also need further inquiry, adjudication and determination.
9. For the above discussed reasons, we hold petitioner entitled to pre-arrest bail. This petition is converted into appeal and the same is allowed. Pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner is confirmed on the bail bonds already furnished with the Deputy Registrar, Judicial of this Court pursuant to order dated 28-7-2009.