1. Present: Mushtaq Ahmad Khan, J SHAFQAT ABBAS V THE STATE Cr. M. No. 5278-B of 1994 23rd January, 1995 Criminal Procedure Code, 1895- -S.497 read with Ss.302,148,149,109 P.P.C.-Bad-Petition for-There is no "other incriminating material against the petitioner except hearsay evidence-Arrest of the petitioner shall definitely result in causing of irreparable loss in his reputation and performance of his functions as a public representation intended arrest of the petitioner hence appears prima facie to be mala fide in laws- held: Bail granted.
2. (Para 4) Date of hearing: 23rd January, 1993 For the Petitioner: Ch. Muhammad Abdul Sale, Advocate.
3. For the State: Farooq Badar, Add!. AG. Punjab.
4. ORDER MUSHTAQ AHMAD KHAN, J,- Shafqat Abbas MPA, the petitioner before this court is co- accused in Case FIR No.284 of 1984, registered at Police Station Sadar Okara, Distrid Oiara, under Sections 302/148/149/109 PPC.2. The allegation against the petitioner is that he abetted the murder of Haji Javed Iqbal real brother of the complainant Khalid Pervez as his demand to give share to him in various contracts obtained by the deceased was not acceded to, hence was killed by M/s Ghulam Haider, Rana Muhammad Akbar, Mushtaq alias Musa and Muhammad Ishaq Kamboh etc. At about 8.00 a m near the bridge at the by-pass situate across Kot Bari mossing. One of the co- accused namely Rana Muhammad Akbar was arrested whereas the others are still absconders.
5. The petitioner initially filed an application for grant of pre-arrest bail in Sessions Court of Okara and joined the investigation during the period of interim to him. Tins application was subsequently transferred to this court in re Cr. M. 205-T/94 and was numbered as CrLM. 4483-B/94 which was dismissed for want of prosecution and the interim to him was withdrawn. On coming to know of the aforementioned order of withdrawal of pre-arrest bail already granted to him and dismissal of the bail application, the petitioner moved the titled petition and has explained therein that his absence on the date when the earlier bail application was fixed before this bench,, was due to a confusion about the bench before whom he had to appear and as such was not intentional.3. In support of this petition Ch.Muhammad Abdu! Sale, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the case against the petitioner is absolutely false and is politically motivated; that the petitioner is, an elected Member of Punjab Provincial Assembly is a respectable citizen of Pakistan and that his intended arrest is based upon rule fide, as such in case he is arrested he will suffer an irreparable loss in reputation and in performance of his representative activitles/functions which he has to perform as Member of the Punjab Provincial Assembly both in the house as well as outside the Assembly, that die petitioner has joined the investigation and has been found mnocent by the Police Crimes Branch, Lahore, who have conducted a through inquiry into the matter which organ is regarded to be the best investigating agency of the province; that no Overt set has been attributed to him and the only evidence against him consists of statements of M/s Ayub son of Jan Muhammad whose sister is married to Tariq Naveed real brother of the deceased and Muhammad Ibrafaeem son of Muhammad Siddiq i.e, who is admittedly to dose relative of the deceased, which statements were recorded on 3.10.15>93 after a period of more than threeSh*ifcji Abbas KTbe State Cr.C. 477#tbs[Vei. Xiv#the(Mushtaq! Ahmad Shari, J)months, from the date of alleged occurrence winch statements even otherwise are not at all admissible as evidence in the case, as the witnesses besides being close relatives of the deceased have deposed that they overheard talk between the petitioner and his gun-man to whom he was saying that be will get Haji Javed Iqbal killed when they were sitting near a chappei in a Bus stand posing as persons in the waiting, to board a bus, as being hear-say and un-natural, hence there is absolutely no incriminating material against the petitioner, his intended arrest as such is based upon mala jutes ; wd that the motive is absolutely insufficient and improbable.As against the above arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Farooq Badar, learned AddL Ady>eg General Punjab, has vehemently opposed the grant of concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and has contended that the petitioner is named in the FIR; that the witnesses of conspiracy/abetment as named in the FIR have implicated the petitioner in their statements made before the Police during the course of investigation although therecorded after a period of more than three months -urn (he date of occurrence; that the case against the petitioner falls within the prohibited degree and being of a heinous nature no concession ,can be shown to the petitioner merely on the ground that he is member of Provincial Assembly as every citizen is equal before law and he having abetted the commission of offence of murder is act entitled to the discretionary relief of grant of pre-arrest bail from this court; and that he wf*s found guilty of abetment during the course of investigation by the DSP Headquarter, Okara. On my query learned Addl Advocate General has conceded that the petitioner has been found innocent by the Grime Branch Police, Lahore md that there is no other mcriminating material against the petitioner except the above referred statements of two witnesses who are class relatives of the deceased.4. I have considered the arguments addressed by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the original record. The petitioner admittedly is a a Member of Punjab Provincial Assembly. He has joined the Police investigation. He has admittedly been declared innocent during the course of investigation conducted by the Crime Branch Police, Lahore although he has not been exonerated by the DSP Headquarter Okara, who has based his findings of the involvement of the petitioner on the statements of Muhammad Ayub son of Jan and Muhammad Ibraheem son of Muhammad Siddique, the witnesses referred to above. However the fact remains that the said witnesses are dose relatives of the deceased and are also chance witnesses. Their statements are also in the nature of hearsay evidence which was recorded after a period of about for months from the date of alleged occurrence therefore admissibility and veracity therefore is yet to be tested at the touch stone of cross-examination when they appear as witnesses during the course of trial For the present there is no other mcriminating material against the petitioner. The reasonableness and probable veracity of the motive as alleged in the FIR, will also require fmtfeer examination to justify a reasonable inference of involvement of the petitioner ms the occurrence in question, as, for the present evidence of motive is also lacking. Theinvestigation so for as the petitioner is concerned, is already and be is nomore required by the Police for the purposes of ammigaticsi as stated by Faroz Din SHO who is presently the iuercjpdihg officer of the case, therefore arrest of the petitioner shall definitely result in causing of irreparable fees in bis reputation and performance of his function as a pubBe represeatath*^ intended arrest of the petitioner hence appears prima fifeda to he mala fide in laws.5. Resultantly I consider it a &t case to grant concession of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner tiQ the disposal of the case against him. He hence is admitted to pre-arrest bail tiB the decision of the case against him on his furnishing of bail bond in the sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- (twenty five lacs rupees) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Okara, within a period of fifteen days i.e.f, today failing which this order of grant of bail, shall automatically lapse. The petitioner shall join the investigation as and when called by the Police, it is further observed that in case sufficient incriminating material comes on the file or the petitioner abuses concession of bail the complainant or the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail which move if made, shall be decided on its on merits strictly in accordance with law. Findings rendered above are tentative in nature for the purpose of this decision of this petition alone and have been recorded without prejudice to subsequent proceedings in the case. Crl. Misc, stands disposed of with the above observations. Copy dasti on payment of usual charges.