1. JAVID IQBAL, J.--In this petition leave to appeal is being sought against the order of the Lahore High Court Multan Bench dated 12th May, 1987 whereby the petitioners' application for bail before arrest was dismissed. Petitioners Mohammad Amin and Anwar A.I alongwith 16 others are involved in a case under sections 302/307/ 148/149, PPC which is under investigation with Crimes Branch Lahore. The Additional Sessions Judge Pakpattan allowed bail before arrest to five of their co- accused namely Haji Asghar A.I, Mohammad Nawaz and Nabi Ahmad as they were empty handed and there was the allegation of only Lalkara against them, as well as Iftikhar Ahmad and Imtiaz for the reason that both were lecturers and well-educated persons and that although Iftikhar Ahmad was armed with a revolver and Imtiaz armed with Sots, there was no allegation as against them that they used their weapons or caused injuries to any person. Two of their other co-accused namely Saeed Ahmad and Mohammad Irshad who were empty handed and there was allegation of Lalkara against them were not challaned by the police because Saeed Ahmad was too old and infirm and Mohammad Irshad was found innocent. The petitioners moved application for bail before arrest before the Lahore High Court Multan Bench, but the learned Single Judge dismissed the same for the reason that they were named in the FIR and they all had armed themselves to launch an attack on the deceased and injured PWs which was premeditated. Learned counsel urged before us that so far as Mohammad Amin petitioner is concerned, although he was stated to be armed with Sota, no specific role had been attributed to him in the FIR and therefore his case was identical to that of Iftikhar Ahmad and Imtiaz who had already been allowed arrest bail by the Sessions Judge for the reason that the pre- complainant party was interested in humiliating and harassing them. It was next submitted that so far as Anwar A.I petitioner is concerned he was armed with Sota and is stated to have inflicted one blow on the head of Mohammad Tufail complainant. But in the FIR which was got recorded by Mohammad Tufail himself it was stated that Anwar A.I petitioner inflicted one blow on the head of Mohammad Tufail and not on him (Mohammad Tufail first informant). It was submitted that both the petitioners had pleaded alibi.
2. They were Government employees and they were present on duty on the date and time of the occurrence.
3. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel. Since specific part has been ascribed to Anwar A.I petitioner in the FIR, in our view no case is made out for the grant of pre-arrest bail to him. His application was therefore correctly rejected by the Lahore High Court and no interference is called for in his case. Hence so far as Anwar A.I petitioner is concerned his petition for leave to appeal is dismissed.
4. But we convert this petition into an appeal so far as Mohammad Amin petitioner is concerned as no specific role is attributed to him in the FIR and his case was at par with Iftikhar Ahmad and Imtiaz who have already been granted pre-arrest bail by the Sessions Court. His appeal is therefore accepted and he is admitted to pre-arrest bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs.25,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge Sahiwal.