1. ' The allegations against the applicant as per F.I.R. Are that on 13-1-1995 he had instigated accused Shahzada and Jumman, who had opened fire with short gun and T.T. Pistol on the complainant and his son Mooj Ali. Complainant Rabnawaz's son received the injuries and died in the hospital. Motive of this incident is stated to that few days before this incident a real brother of the present applicant was killed and they had doubt on the complainant and deceased Mooj Ali.
2. ' The applicant moved bail before arrest application in the Court of IV-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi East, which was rejected on 30-5-1995, therefore, he moved this Court and was granted interim bail before arrest on 11-6-1995.
3. ' Mr. Syed Mahmood Alam Rizvi, learned counsel for applicant has argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to admitted enmity between the parties. There is no evidence against the applicant except that complainant has stated in the F.I.R. That he had instigated the co-accused persons. His further contention is that the applicant was in Jacobabad at the time of incident. He has produced photostat copy of a ticket of Blue Line Coach. He has also argued that the accused will suffer humiliation and maltreatment at the hands of police if he is arrested. He has relied upon the cases of Meeran Bux v. The State and another reported in PLD 1989 SC 347, Muhammad Ra77aq and others v. The State and others reported in PLD 1992 Shariat Court (AJ&K) 1, Malik Noor Ahmad and another v. The State reported in PLD 1993 Lah. 500 and Sulan and another v. The State reported in 1995 PCr.LJ 671.
4. ' Mr. Habib Ahmad, learned counsel for State has opposed this bail application and has stated that the name of the applicant appears in the F.I.R. And according to the complainant on his instigation his son was murdered.
5. ' Mr. Muhammad Anwar Tariq, learned counsel for complainant has argued that after the grant of interim bail before arrest by this Court, the applicant, has subsequently committed murder of brother of complainant and as such F.I.R. Has been lodged being, Crime No,82 of 1995, dated 19-6- 1995, at P.I.B. Colony Police Station. An affidavit of the complainant has also been filed in this Court alongwith photocopy of that F.I.R. In which it has been stated that the applicant had also extended threats to him as well as his younger brother Ali Buz to finish them as they were pursuing the case against the present applicant and actually he finished Ali Bux on 19-6-1995. Mr. Muhammad Anwar Tariq has relied upon the case of Aziz Khan v. Rashid Ahmad and others in 1982 SCMR 547.
6. ' I have gone through the order dated 30-5-1995 of the trial Court and the authorities cited by the learned counsel for the parties. The facts mentioned the authorities cited by the learned counsel for applicant are distinguishable from the facts of the present case. In the F.I.R. Name of the present applicant is clearly mentioned and allegation against him is that he had instigated the co- accused persons to open fire on the complainant and his son. The applicant has failed to produce any proof showing that he was in Jacobabad at the time of incident. The Blue Line Coach ticket produced by him does not mention his name and the same cannot be taken into consideration.
7. There is nothing on record to suggest that the applicant might have been implicated falsely in this case. There is difference between the bail before arrest and after arrest. The applicant has also to show his conduct and according to the subsequent F.I.R. Lodged on 19-6-1995 at P.I.B. Colony Police Station, after the grant of interim bail before arrest, it is alleged therein that the present applicant had committed murder of the brother of the complainant. The provisions of section 109, P.P.C. Is attracted in the present case. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the applicant has failed to make out a case for bail before arrest.
8. Accordingly, the application for bail before arrest is rejected, with the result that the interim bail before arrest granted to applicant Azizullah is cancelled.
9. Pre-arrest .