Through this petition, petitioners Abdul Razaq, Khalid Mehmood, Muhammad Saeed alias Saidu and Muzammal Sohail seek pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R No, 372, dated 27.09.2011, offences under Sections 337-A2, 337-Al, 148, 149, PPC, registered at Police Station Blochni, District Faisalabad.
2. At the very outset, the Investigating Officer present with record states that Muhammad Saeed alias Saidu Petitioner No, 3 has been declared innocent and is not required in this case. In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the petitioners does not press this petition to the extent of Muhammad Saeed alias Saidu petitioner, this petition to his extent is dismissed having been withdrawn.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner, Abdul Razzaq during the investigation has successfully proved that he was not armed with any weapon; even otherwise injury attributed to him falls under Section 337-A(i), PPC whereas injury declared by the doctor falling under Section 337-A(ii), PPC has not been assigned to any of the petitioners; that injuries attributed to Khalid Mehmood and Muzammal Sohail, petitioners have been declared falling under Section 337-L(i), PPC and to their extent police has opined that though they were present at the place of occurrence but they were empty handed; that case against the petitioners is based upon mala fide of the complainant; that no specific injury is attributed to any of the petitioners on the person of Muhammad Khan, injured.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor assisted by learned counsel for the complainant while opposing this bail application contends that pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief which cannot be granted in routine without proving the mala fide of the police or the complainant; that petitioners are nominated in the F.I.R with their specific roles of causing injuries to the injured Aadil and general beating to Muhammad Khan, injured; that Muhammad Khalid, petitioner was armed with pistol, therefore, they are not entitled for grant of bail.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. Admittedly there is delay of six days in lodging of the F.I.R without any plausible explanation. Even otherwise, the complainant is not the eye-witness of the occurrence as he heard about the occurrence on phone and thereafter he came to the place of occurrence. Learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor after consulting the record states that according to the police opinion, Abdul Razaq and Khalid Mehmood, petitioners were although present at the place of occurrence but they were empty handed, therefore, question of recovery from both these petitioners is inconsequential.
The injuries attributed to petitioners Khalid Mehmood and Muzammal Sohail have been declared falling under Section 337-L(i), PPC, whereas injury falling under Section 337-: F(ii), PPC has not been assigned to any of the petitioners. In view of all above, I do not find any justifiable reason to send the petitioners behind he bars, therefore, ad-interim pre-arrest bail already allowed to the petitioners by this Court rule order dated 28.10.2011, is hereby confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only each with one surely each in he like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Area Magistrate within a period of 10 days from today.
7. It is, however, clarified that observations made herein above are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition.