' This is an application for grant of pre-arrest bail to Mumtaz Ahmed and Abdul Ghafoor petitioners in a case under section 302/201/34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Bhong, vide F.I.R. No,2/89, dated 8-1-1989.
2. The prosecution case is that the petitioners and 2 others in furtherance of their common intention have caused the death of Dur Muhammad on 8-1-1989 in Mouza Rangpur of Police Station Bhong. The petitioners were found innocent during the investigation and their names were placed in column No,2 of the challan. The case was sent up to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge, Rahimyar Khan entrusted the case to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rahimyar Khan for trial who has issued non-bailable warrants for the arrest of the petitioners, hence this application.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have falsely been involved in the case; that they have been declared innocent during the investigation; that their names are placed in column No,2 of the challan and that the learned trial Court has issued non-bailable warrants of their arrest. The learned counsel for the State has opposed this application.
4. I have considered the matter carefully. I find that the petitioners have been found innocent during the investigation; they were not arrested at all by the police; their names were moreover placed in column No,2 of the Chillan; that the learned trial Court has straightaway issued non- bailable warrants for the arrest of petitioners and as such there is an imminent danger of their being sent to jail. No doubt in the instant case, according to the fourth column of the second schedule, a warrant should be issued in the first instance yet the trial Court had a discretion to issue a summons or bailable warrant for causing the petitioners/accused to be brought before the Court to face trial. I feel that since the petitioners were found innocent and their names were placed in column No,2 of the challan, therefore, instead of issuing non-boilable warrants against the petitioners, the trial Court should have issued summons or bailable warrants.
5. For what has been said above, the interim to the petitioners B on 26-9-1989 is confirmed.