Petitioner Hamid Abbas seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 146 dated 14.05.2012 under Section 337A(iv), PPC registered at Police Station City Yazman District Bahawalpur.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that earlier the petitioner was arrested in this case on 11.07.2012 and was granted bail by the learned trial Court on 09.07.2012; however, upon filing of application under Section 497(5),' Cr.P.C. by the complainant, his bail was cancelled by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yazman on 10.69.2012. Further contends that the injury attributed to the petitioner has already been declared falling under Section 337F(v), PPC and punishment provided for the same is five years that does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C; that while canceling the bail of the petitioner the learned Additional Sessions Judge has observed that after refusal of pre-arrest bail of an accused on merits he cannot be granted after arrest 'bail on the same grounds, however, the considerations for the grant of bail before arrest and after arrest bail are all together different.
3. On the other hand learned law officer assisted by learned counsel for the complainant while opposing this bail application contends that the petitioner is nominated in the FIR with the specific role of causing an injury on the fingers of right hand of female injured with "Soto". Further contends that the petitioner was arrested of 11.07.2012 and just after seven days he was granted bail by the learned trial Court and that during the investigation the petitioner has been found fully involved in the occurrence.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. Admittedly the petitioner was earlier granted bail after arrest by the learned trial Court on 18.07.2012 and the same was cancelled by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 10.09.2012 by observing that birth certificate of the petitioner was never produced before the learned trial Court and that when pre-arrest bail of an accused is dismissed on merits he cannot be granted post arrest bail on the same grounds. It is established principle of law that considerations for the grant of pre-arrest bail and that of after arrest bail are altogether different. The injury attributed to the petitioner has already been declared attracting the offence under Section 337F(v), PPC, which does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The investigating officer, present in Court, after consulting the record confirms that the petitioner has no previous criminal record. Therefore, I do not find any justifiable reason to send the petitioner behind the bars who was earlier granted bail after arrest by the learned trial Court.
In view of the above, ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to petitioner by this Court on 18.09.2012 is hereby confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Area Magistrate within a period of fifteen days.
6. It is, however, clarified that observations made herein are just tentative in nature and strictly confined to the disposal of this bail petition,