' ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.---Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. Rana Mubashar Ali petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,1124 of 2012, dated 31-7-2012 registered at Police Station Allama Iqbal Town, Lahore in respect of an offence under section 394, P.P.C.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been roped in this case by the complainant with mala fide intention and ulterior motives after joining hands with the local police. The petitioner was called by one Javed Kharadia with whom the injured/complainant has friendly relations for the purpose of effecting compromise a gathering was called upon by the parties and during negotiation there happened scuffle between the parties and during such scuffle the petitioner was seriously injured. Later on the petitioner was removed to hospital and during scuffle Malik Riaz received injuries by the hands of Javed Kharadia. The police was not bringing on record the version of the petitioner and that is why he was constrained to file a private complaint wherein the complainant and his co-accused have been summoned to face trial. The petitioner is a respectable person who contested election for the post of Naib Nazim in the year 2005. The story narrated in the F.I.R. Is totally false and implausible because a single person could not commit robbery on road side with three persons. Due to his miserable health condition the petitioner is languishing in jail hospital. He is previous non-convict, the investigation of this case is complete, the person of the petitioner is not required by the police for further investigation, thus, his continuous incarceration in jail would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
3. On the other hand the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General assisted by the learned counsel for the petitioner after going through the record submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. And specific role of causing injury to the injured victim is attributed to him. The role attributed to the petitioner is borne out from the Medico-legal Certificate of the injured victim. There is absolutely no mala fide on the part of the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioner in this case. The prosecution witnesses in their statements recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. Duly involve the petitioner in this case. During the investigation of this case the petitioner has been found guilty and recoveries have also been affected from the petitioner. Challan has been submitted and now trial is in progress. The offence with which the petitioner is charged falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. It has been noticed that the learned counsel for the petitioner has tendered some documents wherefrom it is established that the petitioner has contested election for the post of Naib Nazim and he seems to be a well-known person in his constituency. Without going into deeper appreciation of merits it has been noticed that the petitioner himself has received injuries during the occurrence and he has also filed a private complainant wherein the complainant party has been summoned to face trial. Thus, all this shows that it is a case of two versions and which version is correct, that would be seen at the time of trial by the learned trial Court after appraising of evidence to be led by the parties. At this juncture the petitioner has succeeded to bring his case within the ambit of further inquiry. Mere heinousness of offence is no ground for refusing bail to an accused. The petitioner is behind the bars since 3-7-2012, investigation of this case is complete, admitted he is previous non-convict. There is no chance of an early conclusion of petitioner's trial in near future, thus, his continuous incarceration would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
5. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,100, 000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
6. Before parting with this order it is, however, clarified that the obserwations made hereinabove are just tentative in nature and the same are strictly confined to the disposal of the instant bail petition. The learned trial court shall proceed with the trial without being prejudice from any observation.