' This is an application for pre-arrest bail moved in case vide F.I.R.No,313 of 1998, dated 8-8-1998 under sections 420, 468 and 471/419, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Lower Mall, Lahore.
2. Briefly stated the facts are that complainant Muhammad Arshad Chaudhary entered into a lease agreement with the present petitioner for land measuring 2 Kanals bearing Khasra No,7616 for a sum Rs,11 lacs and paid a sum of Rs,2 lacs to him in the presence of Muhammad Munir Ahmad, and Saghir Ali, the petitioner thereafter took him to the office of Mr. Abdul Qayyum Qureshi, Advocate, for the execution of said deed who received a sum of Rs,34,500. However, the lease deed was not handed over to him even after the expiry of four months. He then again approached Mr. Abdul Qayyum Qureshi, Advocate, who accepted Rs, 2 lacs from him and showed him a copy of Fard issued by some Patwari. The petitioner purchased non judicial stamp paper of Rs,5,620 on 22- 4-1999 and got a lease deed prepared and handed over the same to him., that on checking he found that the said land never belonged to the petitioner and it actually vests with the Auqaf Department. Accordingly he lodged the instant F.I.R.
3. The petitioner approached the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Lahore for his pre-arrest bail which was entrusted to the learned Additional Session Judge, Lahore who vide order, dated 27-1- 1999 granted pre-arrest bail to Abdul Qayyum Qureshi, Advocate and declined the said relief to the present petitioner. Feeling aggrieved of the said order he has approached this Court for the same relief.
4. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the role attributed to the present petitioner is at par with Abdul Qayyum Qureshi, so relying upon the principle of consistency, he is also entitled to the same relief and relied upon Muhammad Afzal alias Bodi v. The State 1979 SCM R 9, that arrest of the petitioner is motivated and ninetieth with mala fide as such he is entitled to the relief sought by him and relied upon Abdul Sattar v. The State and others 1989 PCr.LJ 77 and Saifur Rehman v. Siraj Khan etc. PLD 1983 Pesh.
232.
6. Conversely the impugned order has been supported by the learned counsel for the State. His contention is that the land regarding which lease deed has been executed by the petitioner does not belong to him and as per certificate issued by the Auqaf Department the same belongs to the said department, that case of the petitioner is not at par with his co-accused as such trial Court has rightly refused the relief claimed by him.
7. From the contents of F.I.R., it is evident that initially bargain was struck between the complainant and petitioner in respect of land measuring 2 Kanals bearing Khasra No,7616 situated within the territorial jurisdiction of Mauza Niaz Beg, Lahore. The petitioner received a sum of Rs,2 lacs out of the said amount and executed the lease deed in respect of that land. According to certificate issued by the Auqaf Department land bearing Khasra Nos.7615 and 7616 (subject-matter of the instant litigation) belongs to the Auqaf Department. a perusal of record shows that a lease deed regarding land bearing Khasra No,7616 has been duly executed and signed by the present petitioner but the same has neither been entered in the relevant register of said Registration office nor finally attested by the Sub Registrar. The mere fact that petitioner has executed lease deed claiming himself to be owner of land which does not belong to him and actually belongs to Auqaf Department, prima facie, connects him with the commission of this offence. This being the factual position, he is not entitled to the extraordinary relief of bail before arrest. Consequently, petition fails and is hereby dismissed.