A case under section 452/337-H(ii)/337-L(ii)/34, P.P.C. Is registered against the petitioner and others vide F.I.R. No,100 of 1999, dated 29-1-1999 at Police Station Jaranwala, District Faisalabad. It was contended in the F.I.R. That the petitioner alongwith others forcibly entered the house of the complainant and started beating his mother and bother. They raised alarm, whereupon, the ineffective firing was made.
2. The petitioner applied for pre-arrest bail which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala vide his detailed order, dated 18-2-1999. Before the order could be announced, the petitioner managed to escape from the Court, whereupon, a notice under section 514, Cr.P.C.
Was issued to the surety of the petitioner for separate action. The learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his impugned order came to the conclusion that the petitioner had no case for pre- arrest bail as he committed trespass into the house of the complainant alongwith others in order to avenge the insult when he was checked by the complainant after he was found drunk and creating fuss in the Bazar a few days earlier to the present occurrence. It was also observed that the petitioner was found guilty in the police investigation as he had made fire shots, however, nobody was injured. The empties were recovered from the place of occurrence and the weapon of offence was yet to be recovered. In view of these facts, the petitioner was denied pre-arrest bail by the Court below.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in the case falsely on account of party faction; that the alleged occurrence is false and since nobody was injured during the transaction, therefore, the petitioner has a case of further inquiry.
4. The points raised above would touch the merits of the case which cannot be undertaken for discussion at this stage lest the trial/investigation itself may be prejudiced. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. And a specific role is attributed to him and a clear motive for the commission of the alleged occurrence is also attributed to him. There is nothing on record to show that in fact the proceedings against him are the result of mala fide on the part of the police or the complainant. In such a situation and particularly when the petitioner escaped from the Court below when the order was announced dismissing his pre-arrest bail petition, the petitioner would have no case for pre- arrest bail to be granted to him by this Court. The investigation in such-like cases should be allowed to take its usual course. The petition is accordingly dismissed in limine.
C.M. No,1 of 1999
5. Disposed of with the disposal of the main petition.