This order shall also dispose of Cr. M. No.2046-B of 1992, both arising out of case F.I.R. No. 352 registered at Police Station Cantt., Sialkot on 7-11-1991 under section 295-C, P.P.C.
2. The facts of the case are stated in some detail in Cr. M. No.4613-B of 1991 and I need not walk over the same ground again. Suffice it here to say that as per allegations, Adam Shah petitioner was a calligraphist having written script of the booklet known as for the purpose of printing and Abdul Razzaq petitioner was allegedly the lessee of printing press known Waqt-e-Nao as VJaqt-e-Nao, Sialkot, where the said booklet was printed. The former was arrested on 30-3=1992 while the latter was arrested on 7-4-1992.
3. It is argued on behalf of Adam Shah petitioner that he had been arrested as Mazahar Hussain Gillani but he is in fact Adam Shah and his name as such is borne on his birth certificate, school leaving certificate, passport and his identity card. In support of his contention the learned counsel has placed on the record the photostat copies of various documents referred to by him. It is further urged that the petitioner, during the investigation, had volunteered specimen handwriting for comparison from the Handwriting Expert and if the text of the booklet were found to be in his writing, he was ready to face any consequences and the police did take his specimen handwriting through the local Magistrate for comparison but they are suppressing the opinion.
4. It is contended on behalf of Abdul Razzaq petitioner that he was an ordinarily employee of Asghar Ali Arshad, the owner of Waqt-e-Nao Press, and after the registration of the case on 7-11- 1991 when the latter found himself in' hot water, he hurriedly obtained from the petitioner, his signatures and thumb-impression on a blank paper and manufactured an affidavit, copy of which is Annexure `D', with a view to show him as a lessee of the press and on the basis of this document, he was arrested. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner has filed a civil suit against Asghar Ali Arshad, seeking the cancellation of the above-mentioned document i.e. The affidavit and the defendant is his written statement has impliedly accepted the petitioner's position as his employee. With reference to the complaint addressed to D.C., Sialkot (Annexure `F'), and (Annexure `G') which is copy of the statement of Asghar Ali Arshad, he submits that the owner of the press, during the course of an enquiry on the said complaint made against him, had made the aforesaid statement before A.D.C.(G) that he had not leased out the press to any oae, nor he had not leased out the press to anyone, nor he could lease it out as the lease of the press was not permissible under relevant law. According to the learned counsel, in these circumstances Asghar Ali Arshad has taken a wrong stand before the Investigating Officer that he has leased out the press to Abdul Razzaq petitioner, who has been made a scapegoat.
5. Both the applications have been opposed on behalf of the State. It is contended that Adam Shah's real name is Mazhar Hussain Shah Gilani and he was rightly arrested as such by the police.
With regard to Abdul Razzaq petitioner, it is argued that he was a lessee of the press where the actionable booklet was printed during the period of his lease and as such he has committed a serious offence.
6. There seems to be a good deal of confusion about the name of the accused who has been described as Mazhar Hussain Shah Gilani in the case as the documents brought on the record indicate that his name is in fact Adam Shah. Whatever his real name may be, the role assigned to him was that he had scribed the text of the actionable book as a calligraphist and since his role as such is not so serious that he should be kept behind the bars for an indefinite period, he is grand bail if he furnishes bail-cum-surety bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Sialkot.
7. So far as Abdul Razzak petitioner is concerned, it appears that he was an ordinary employee of Waqt-e-Nao Press and its proprietor Asghar Ali Arshad, who is also a co-accused in this case, seems to have made him a scapegoat in order to save his own skin by showing him as the lessee of the press and thereby shifting his own responsibility of printing an actionable book at his press on him. Under the relevant law governing the press, he could not g lease it out and he knew the legal position very well as it appears from his statement recorded by him in an earlier enquiry conducted by A.D.C.(G), Sialkot, for illegally leasing out the press to some one. Abdul Razzak petitioner is, therefore, also granted bail if he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs.10,000 - with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the same officer as mentioned above.
8. Since Asghar Ali Arshad co-accused is said to have hurriedly and illegally been bailed out by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, the record of the bail application disposed of by him should be summoned for 13-7-1992 and the Investigating Officer should also be asked to appear.