ORDER ALTAF - IBRAHIM QURESHI, J.---Through the instant petition, the petitioner Muhammad Mansha, seeks pre-arrest bail in a case arising out of F.I.R. No.258, dated 5-4-2011, registered with Police Station Saddar Kasur, District Kasur under sections 337-A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(ii), 452, 148 and 149, P.P.C.
2. Precisely the allegation against the present petitioner is that he along with his co-accused while armed with their respective deadly weapons entered the house of the complainant and caused injuries to Muhammad Rafi and on petitioner's instigation his co-accused caused injuries to the complainant and his family members.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that allegations against the petitioner are false, he has not committed any offence; that injury attributed to the petitioner is self-inflicted that section 452, P.P.C. Is not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the case; that a cross-version has also been lodged by the accused side, in which Mst. Hajran Bibi mother-in-law of the, petitioner- accused, Muhammad Mansha, present petitioner, Muhammad Sajjad, Muhammad Ramzan and Muhammad Ameen Shah are shown injured, whose MLC are also available on the record but the I.O. Is reluctant to arrest the accused of cross-version; that the offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Prayed that this application be allowed.
4. On the other hand, learned D.P.-G. Assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed this bail application on the grounds that actually the petitioner-accused party was the aggressor; that petitioner along with his co-accused trespassed into the house of the complainant; that petitioner is a previous record holder as he is involved in so many other criminal cases; that recovery is yet to be effected; that as a result of occurrence Mst. Ameena Bibi and 'Muhammad Rafi sustained injuries on their person; that the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Prayed that bail be dismissed.
5. I have heard the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
6. Occurrence is admitted. Both sides have alleged that they have caused injuries to each other as a result of which five persons from petitioner side and two persons from complainant side have been shown injured. The injuries alleged to have been caused by the petitioner side fall under section 337-A(ii) while that of sustained by mother-in-law of the petitioner Muhammad Mansha is a fracture of radius Ulna of left hand which fact has been suppressed by the complainant side.
MLCs are of same date. So far as alleged involvement of the petitioner in other criminal cases is concerned, learned counsel for the complainant has failed to substantiate this contention as petitioner has not been convicted in any of the said cases. A wider net had been thrown by the complainant to involve as many as persons he could, in this case which shows the mala fide on his part especially when he suppressed the injuries of accused-petitioner's side, so does not come to this court with clean hands. Nothing incriminating could be recovered from the petitioner when he had joined the investigation of this case and in these circumstances, no coercive measures should be adopted for effecting the recovery and the police could not be allowed to adopt third degree methods for creating evidence. Case of the petitioner does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Resultantly, this application is allowed. Ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide order of this Court dated 23-5-2011 is hereby confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court..