' This composite order shall dispose of instant petition for grant of pre-arrest bail titled Sardar Muhammad Ameer Khan v. State (Criminal Miscellaneous No, 984-B of 2013) as well as connected post-arrest bail petition titled Abdul Ghaffur v. State (Criminal Miscellaneous No,1174-B of 2013) as both have emanated from same F.I.R. No,39 dated 1-6-2013 registered at Police Station Bosal, Distt.
Attock on the complaint of Muhammad Dawood Naqeebi under sections 148/149/109/337A(i)
(ii)/337F(i)/302, P.P.C. Read with section 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.
2. Epigrammatically, in the misadventure incident, Muhammad Dawood Mustafai was done to death by fire shots whereas Ahmad Ullah, Muhammad Razzaq, Muhammad Ummer Farooq, Aziz Ahmad and Tariq Saeed were caused injuries by petitioner Abdul Ghafoor and his co-accused on the alleged abetment/conspiracy of the petitioner Sardar Muhammad Ameer Khan.
' Through assortment role explored assigned to petitioner Sardar Muhammad Ameer Khan is that he allegedly criminally machinated/conspired with his accomplice for the alleged commission of occurrence whereas Abdul Ghaffur petitioner has been attributed an injury having been caused with a pistol on the right index finger of Tariq. Saeed injured P.W. Motive reported to be a dispute over a plot of land between the parties.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 16 persons have been nominated and 11 have been mentioned as unacquainted for the alleged incident whereas a false role of abetment without being mentioned its any detail in the F.I.R., petitioner Sardar Muhammad Ameer Khan has been involved; an injury allegedly attributed to co-petitioner Abdul Ghaffur has not been noticed corroborated by the MLR of the injured; the petitioner Sardar Ameer Khan being head of the family of his co-accused and as being a law knowing person has been falsely involved in order to deter him from pursuing the case; post to the registration of the case, statements of two persons namely Ameer Muhammad and Hafiz Muhammad Nawaz, the close relatives of the deceased, have been recorded as to hatching the alleged conspiracy but their statements do not fit in the prosecution case; he has joined investigation and nothing is required to be recovered from him, therefore, he may be granted relief of pre-arrest bail and in case the same is declined, he would suffer an irretrievable loss to his reputation and humiliation as he is a practising lawyer.
4. Learned Law Officer has been found nolo contenders and has relied upon arguments of learned counsel for the complainant.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that both the petitioners are nominated in the F.I.R.; the whole case revolves around petitioner Sardar Muhammad Arneer Khan and he being the abettor by providing weapons to his co-accused and on account of his involvement in the occurrence by the investigating agency is not entitled for extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail by any stretch of imagination, particularly, when he has chequered history of his involvement in criminal cases and has been playing hide and seek with the courts; moreso co-accused, his real son, namely Muhammad Abbas, has absconded along with some other co-accused. Learned counsel for both the parties have referred to and relied upon precedential laws respectively.
However, in opposing bail application of Abdul Ghaffur co-petitioner, learned counsel has been noticed as half-hearted.
6. Arguments heard assiduously; with eagle eyes, record perused.
7. It has been observed that no details of the alleged conspiracy/abetment such as day, time and place has been mentioned in the F.I.R. Petitioner Sardar Muhammad Ameer Khan is a practising lawyer, he has joined investigation and is no more required for the same. Circumstances available together permit that on account of his propinquity with the co-accused who allegedly physically participated in the occurrence, chances of his false implication cannot be ruled out. According to prosecution's own case, he did not participate in the occurrence. Life and liberty of a subject of State is most precious to a jewel; just to quench the thurst, law does not permit sending a person behind the bars whereas the same stands as a wall of glasses to shield and save the innocent persons from humiliation and sending them behind the bars and abscondence of the co-accused cannot be attributed to the petitioner. In these circumstances, instant petition to extend extra- ordinary relief of pre-arrest bail to petitioner Sardar Muhammad Ameer Khan is accepted and pre- arrest bail already granted to him is confirmed provided his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (two lacs) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court within 30 (thirty) days commencing by tomorrow.
8. So far as case of petitioner Abdul Ghaffur in connected petition is concerned, he did not cause any injury to the deceased and injury attributed to him qua the injured mentioned herein above has not been found cohesion by his Medico-legal Report as doctor has opined that the injury was caused with blunt means and the same is otherwise on the non-vital part of the body. Learned counsel for the complainant has been observed nolo contendere qua him, therefore, connected petition for grant of post-arrest bail to petitioner Abdul Ghaffur is accepted and he is admitted to post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (two lacs) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.