' SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.---Apprehending his arrest at the hands of police, through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks his pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 634, dated 29-7-2013, offence under section 337F(iii), 34, P.P.C., registered with Police Station, Kot Lakhpat, Lahore.
2. Allegation against the petitioner, in brief, as per contents of the crime report is that on 30-6-2013 at 6-25 p.m. He along with his co-accused while armed with dandas launched attack upon the complainant and gave fists blows to him and during the occurrence, the fingers of both the hands of the complainant were injured.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is innocent, who has falsely been involved in this case by the complainant against the actual facts and circumstances with mala fides. It is submitted that there is delay of twenty-nine days in lodging the F.I.R., which has not been explained by the prosecution. Adds that the story contained in the crime report does not sound sense. It is argued that no specific injury is ascribed to the petitioner; rather role of joint/collective nature has been ascribed to him. Learned counsel submits that the offence alleged against the petitioner does not attract the prohibition contained in section 497(1), Cr.P.C. In such circumstances, it is argued that no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner behind the bars.
4. Contrarily, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this petition. It is argued that the petitioner is named in the crime report with specific allegation. Moreover, it is a pre-arrest bail and the same can be granted sparingly.
5. Arguments advanced from all corners have been heard. Record available on file perused.
6. There is no denial to this factum that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R., however, I am afraid this Court has to see from the facts and circumstances that whether case against the petitioner to the extent of grant of relief prayed for is made out or not. There is delay of twenty nine days in lodging the crime report for which no plausible explanation has been rendered by the prosecution.
Even no specific role/injury has been ascribed to the petitioner; rather role of collective/joint nature has been ascribed to the petitioner. The offence alleged against the petitioners does not attract the prohibition contained in section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Liberty of a person is a precious right which cannot be curtailed merely on the basis of bald allegations. In such circumstances especially when nothing is to be recovered from the petitioner, sending the petitioner behind the bars would not serve any useful purpose.
7. For the foregoing facts and circumstances, this Court is persuaded to accept the petition.
Resultantly by allowing this petition, ad-interim bail already granted to the petitioner in terms of order dated 23-10-2013 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.