Through this petition, Khalil Ahmad, Iqbal alias Papu and Gulzar Ahmed, the petitioners, seek pre- arrest bail in case FIR No, 379/2017, dated 11.10.2017, offences under Sections 337-F(iii), F(i), A(i), 148, 149, PPC, registered with the Police Station Thingi, District Vehari.
2. Precisely, according to the crime report dated 11.10.2017 lodged by Hanifan Bibi complainant, the allegations against the petitioners are that they while armed with different weapons assaulted upon the complainant's party and during the occurrence petitioner Khalil Ahmed inflicted a sota blow injury on the forehead of Muhammad Imran and Gulzar Ahmed petitioner also caused a sota blow injury on the knee of Muhammad Imran whereas petitioner Iqbal inflicted a sota blow on the right wrist of Ramzana Bibi.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. After careful consideration of respective arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Law Officer and after careful perusal of the record, I found that the injury attributed to the petitioner Khalil Ahmed has been declared falling under Section 337-A(i) PPC, which is bailable in nature Whereas, injuries attributed to the petitioners Iqbal alias Pappu and Gulzar Ahmed have been declared falling under section 337-F(iii) PPC and the same does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497 Cr.P.C.
5. Besides above, it is noticed that the occurrence allegedly took place on 05.10.2017, whereas, the matter was reported to the Police on 11.10.2017 after delay of six days for Which no plausible explanation has been rendered by the complainant side and thus the same is fatal to the case of prosecution at this stage.
6. As far as the matter of vicarious liability, it would be seen at the time of trial after recording the evidence. Guidance is sought from Muhammad Azeem and others v. the State and others (2015 YLR 2441) and Munawar v. The State (1981 SCM R 1092).
7. In the attending circumstances, prima facie the prosecution has no sufficient incriminating material to connect the petitioner with the commission of alleged offence and chances of petitioners' false implication with deliberation after consultation cannot be ruled out, therefore, sending the petitioners behind the bars would not serve any useful purpose. Pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary relief to be granted only in extraordinary situations to protect innocent persons against victimization through abuse of law for ulterior motive. Guidance is sought from Rana Muhammad Arshad v. Muhammad Rafique and another (PLD 2009 Supreme Court 427).
8. For the above reasons, this petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners is confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,200,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.