' This order shall dispose of two bail petitions i,e, Criminal Miscellaneous No,70/B of 1999 and Criminal Miscellaneous No,69/B of 1999.
2. The petitioner before us in both these petitions is one Khanzada Muhammad Ali Khan alias Moodi and the allegations in F.I.R. No,64 of 1998, dated 20-3-1998 which form the subject-matter of the former bail petition in terms of the statement made by Hafiz Abdul Saboor complainant is that the said complainant was a student of first year and was resident of F-Block in Model Town; that the said complainant had some quarrel with one Tauqir Shah; that on 18-3-1998 while the said complainant was returning home after attending some private tuition classes the said Tauqeer Shah alongwith .Moodi petitioner and others out of whom the said petitioner was armed with a .30 bore pistol reached there whereafter Moodi petitioner put the barrel of his pistol on the neck of the complainant and hit the complainant with the butt of his pistol; that having done this the petitioner commanded the complainant under the said abovementioned threat to accompany the said accused; took him in House No,28 Block-G in Model Town where the complainant was given beating and that it was finally around mid-night that the accused persons finally released the complainant. While the petitioner was absconding in this case another F.I.R. Was recorded against the petitioner and others which bears F.I.R. No,255 of 1998 of the same police station i,e, Police Station Model Town, Lahore and which F.I.R. Is dated 12-10-1998 and is subject-matter of Criminal Miscellaneous No,69/B of 1999. According to the allegations levelled through this F.I.R. Which was lodged at the instance of one Syed Kaleem-ur-Rehman the petitioner and others had demanded a ransom of Rs,5,00,000 and had consequently, made an attempt to abduct a nephew of the complainant, namely, Wasif while the petitioner was armed with a .30 bore pistol and his companion was also armed with pistol.
3. The learned counsel canvassed bail for the petitioner in both these petitions on the grounds that these cases were false; that the offence alleged again the petitioner did not fall within the prohibitory clause; that three of the co-accused persons of the present petitioner had been released by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and that in the circumstances the petitioner was also entitled to the concession of bail.
4. Having been accused of the commission of an offence punishable under section 365/342/337-A, P.P.C. And while the petitioner was absconding, he is alleged to have committed another similar offence punishable under section 365/511, P.P.C. The learned counsel could not offer any satisfactory or reasonable explanation why the petitioner should be repeatedly, falsely, involved in such cases. The decision reached by a learned Additional Sessions Judge in granting bail to co- accused persons is not a decision binding on this Court and, therefore, it is not possible for us to follow the said decision of the said learned Judge. No ground for bail is made out and these petitions are, therefore, dismissed.