' The petitioners seek bail before arrest in case F.I.R. No,257 of 2001 registered on 26-4-2001 under sections 337-A(ii)/427, 148/149, 337-F(ii) and 337-L(ii), P.P.C. At Police Station Ghulam Muhammad Abad, Faisalabad, at the instance of Muhammad Younas.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case, as stated by the complainant Muhammad Younas, are that he is a labourer. He was present in the Hotel on 25-4-2001 at 3-00 p.m. When Abdul Aleem, Sultan, Abdul Aziz and Muzammal came at the hotel took the bread without making payment. They were asked to make payment but Abdul Aleem threatened the servant of the complainant with dire consequences. The servant of the complainant also used filthy language against Abdul Aleem etc. After about five minutes Abdul Aleem, Abdul Jabbar, Abdul Razzaq, Abdul Hakeem, Abdur Rehman, Abdul Aziz and Ubaid Ullah etc. Came while armed with Dandas and raised Lalkaras.
Abdul Jabbar was armed with hockey and Abdul Razzaq armed with Danda, who caused injuries to the complainant, his brother, nephew and servant. The injuries were received by Muhammad Yousaf, Muhammad Afzal and Safdar Ali on different parts of the body. They also caused damage to the crockery of the hotel. The occurrence was witnessed by different persons.
3. The motive of the occurrence is that accused Abdul Jabbar etc. Are owners of Medical Store and sell wine and other narcotics items. Due to this reason they were given a notice for the ejectment.
The case was registered. Muhammad Afzal received six injuries. Injury No,11 was kept under observation and rest of the injuries were found under section 337-L(ii), P.P.C. Safdar Ali also received four injuries, one was kept under observation, the rest of the injuries were found simple and punishable under section 337-L, P.P.C. Similarly Faryad Ali received five injuries. All the injuries were punishable under section 337-L(ii), P.P.C. Muhammad Yousaf received three injuries punishable under sections 337-L(ii) and 337-F(ii), P.P.C. All the injuries were found to have been caused by blunt weapons.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners side also received injuries and four persons were injured during the occurrence. Their medical examination was conducted and medico-legal reports were produced before the Investigating Officer for the registration of the case but instead of registering the case, the Investigating Officer is siding with the complainant party and has failed to perform his obligatory duties. This application is at page 25 of this petition.
He further contends that Abdul Jabbar is contesting the local bodies election. Ubaid Ullah is a student of F.A. And he was present in the Examination Hall and has been falsely involved. He contends that the basic principle for the grant of bail before-arrest is that it is to save the honour and dignity of a person and is meant to protect the innocent person from their involvement in the false cases. He further contends that offences are not covered by the prohibition contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant has contended that the F.I.R. Has been lodged with promptitude. The names of the accused are mentioned in the F.I.R. In the absence of any, previous enmity there is no chance of false implication of the petitioners in this case. The petitioners are not entitled to bail before-arrest at least.
6. Learned State Counsel has also opposed the bail application of the petitioners.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully. I have noticed that an application was moved on behalf of the accused for the registration of. The case to S.S.P., Faisalabad in which it is mentioned that four persons from the accused side also received injuries and the case has not been registered by the S.H.O. I have noticed that the medical reports are attached with this petition. I have noticed that four injuries on the persons of the accused side are with sharp-edged weapons and rest of the injuries on the persons of the accused are with blunt weapons. Learned counsel for the complainant has failed to give any explanation that how sharp- edged injuries are found on the person of the accused which has some duration and it seems that these were caused during the occurrence. The complainant has suppressed the injuries on the persons of the accused and suppression of injuries cast serious doubt in the prosecution case. The complainant has not come forth with clean hands. The other important factor which cannot be ignored is that the bail of the petitioners should not be cancelled as the petitioners also claim that they received the injuries during the occurrence and the police has not treated them at par with the complainant side, who have to be given equal treatment. In this case the police, prima facie, sided with the complainant party and refused to register the case or even to record the cross- version of the petitioners against the complainant side.
8. In these circumstances mala fides of the police and the complainant are crystal clear. Nothing incriminating could be recovered from the petitioners when they had joined the investigation of this case. The petitioners are seven real brothers. It seems that the complainant has widen its net to involve all the family members in this case. The bail before-arrest is meant to protect the innocent persons if there are chances of false implication of the accused. In this case the injuries attributed to the petitioners are not punishable with death or transportation for life or 10 years' R.I.
The sending of the petitioners to jail will not serve any purpose for the prosecution but on the other hand they will suffer an irreparable loss.
9. In view of the circumstances discussed above the petitioners are entitled to bail before-arrest and the bail granted to them is hereby confirmed.
Pre-arrest .