' The occurrence took place at about 10 p.m. On 17-5-1988 in village Narali and the F.I.R. Was lodged by Musthaq Hussain petitioner against the respondents the next day at 5 a.m. There is a counter- complaint case by one Nazir Hussain which was filed in Court on 26-5-1988, he having failed to get a case registered in spite of the orders of the Magistrate, the District Magistrate and the D.I.-G.
2. The respondents moved for bail before arrest which was granted and then confirmed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, vide order dated 4-7-1988. I have been taken through the order and it amounts to a complete judgment on the merits of the case after looking into the case diaries, particularly those recorded by the A.S.P. Such an exercise was uncalled for at bail before arrest stage and cannot be appreciated at all.
3. According to the police investigation Abdur Razzaq and Muhammad Ashfaq respondents have been found innocent and have not been challaned at all; they were rather got discharged from the Magistrate. Azhar Hussain respondent has also been found innocent and placed in column No,2 of the challan.
4. In the occurrence reported to the police by Musthaq Hussain against the present respondents, eight persons were injured, seven by fire-arm and one by blunt weapon. On the other hand, the case of the respondents in the complaint case is that actually Nazir Hussain complainant was assaulted at his shop by Murtaza respondent alongwith ten others where Parvez Iqbal, who has also been challaned in the present case, was sitting there and he actually fired and injured the P.Ws. Of this case.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents has given a long history of litigation between the parties and political rivalry springing from an election petition filed by Abdur Razzaq respondent against the then sitting M.N.A. And the involvement of the then sitting M.PA. Against the respondent party.
He also drew the attention of the Court to the observation of the A.S.P. That the then M.PA. Was present in the police station when the present F.I.R. Was lodged. The police have challaned as observed above, Pervaz Iqbal and a carbine has also been recovered from him.
6. The occurrence being admitted, it was not a case of bail before arrest. The parties should have been arrested and their versions recorded and then if the police thought that someone was not to be challaned, then they might have held their hands off. Since Muhammad Ashfaq and Abdur Razzaq respondents have been found innocent and are not the accused, the petition qua them stands dismissed. Azhar respondent, though found innocent by the police, is injured and his participation in the occurrence is, therefore, obvious at this stage beyond any doubt. The other respondents are also implicated. So, the bails granted to the respondents except Abdur Razzak, Muhammad Ashfaq and Murtaza to whom only simple injury and that too by a stone throw is ascribed, are cancelled. This order would not, as requested by the learned counsel for the respondents, affect the appreciation by the learned lower Court of bail after arrest petition if and when moved.
' The petition stands disposed of accordingly.