' Through this application under section 498, Cr.P.C. The petitioner seeks bail before arrest in case.
F.I.R. No, 156 registered on 15-6-2002 under sections 186, 188, 228, 353 and 506(2) P.P.C. At Police Station Civil Lines Sialkot, lodged by Mr. .Muhammad Rashid Qamar, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sialkot. The contents of the F.I.R. Are reproduced as under:- "I was appointed as Inquiry Officer against Muhammad Jamil Stenographer on the complaint of Mr. Nazir Ahrnad Langah, learned Additional District and 'Sessions Judge, Sialkot. Today inquiry proceedings were fixed for recording of prosecution evidence. At about 12-30 p.m. I started inquiry proceeding in my chamber. Muhammad Jamil accused stenographer, Muhammad Ashraf COC.
Prosecutor and Muhammad Nazir Ahmad Langha, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge Sialkot were present with me in Chamber. Statement of Muhammad Nazir Ahmad Langha, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sialkot was being recorded. Suddenly Hafiz Ghafoor Ahmad, Advocate, District Bar Association Sialkot entered into my Chmaber without my permission in an objectionable manner and shouted that inquiry should be conducted in open Court. He was asked that it is pure departmental inquiry and you have no concern with it then he extended threats to me after having infuritive. Thereafter, police constable/ Nail) Court of this Court was summoned and ordered to take away him outside the chamber and he was directed while ordering that he would not again enter in the chamber, venue of inquiry. He then went out from the chamber. After sometime at about 1-45 p.m. He again entered into Court premises in presence of Court officials and forcibly after pushing the door entered into the chamber . At that time some other Advocates were also present with him. However, they tried to restrain him not to do such an illegal act and did not take law into his hands even intuitive and rude manner while abusing and giving filthy languages to the mother of Nazir Ahmad Langha, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sialkot, extended threats to kill him as also Mr. Nazir Ahmad Langha, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sialkot and tried to physical assault us. He also raised Lalkara that he would not permit the Inquiry Officer to conduct inquiry into Chamber. This incident was witnessed by public at large. Thereafter, by the intervention of some senior Advocates i,e, Rana Altaf Hussain Khan etc. Took out from the Chamber. In the light of the above serious threats police contingents reached into Court room. On seeing them he slipped away from the spot. From the such act Hafiz Ghafoor Ahmad has. Committed criminal offences under sections 186, 188, 228, 353 and 506 Part-2, P.P.C.
Along with offences enabling the provision of law. Hence you are directed to register a criminal case against him immediately under intimation to the undersigned."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Mr, Nazir Ahmad Langha, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge disposed of Civil Appeal No,7 of 2002 vide judgment dated 23-5-2002 but two judgments for the same matter were signed by him with some difference in para. 8 of both the judgments thereby changing the fate of the decision and in order to cover up the said illegality, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge,( Mr. Nazir Ahmad Langha,) involved his Stenographer against whom inquiry was initiated where for complainant was appointed as Inquiry Officer who became inimical towards the petitioner having moved an application on 3-6-2002 to the Chief Justice of this Court for initiation of action against Mr. Nazir Ahmad Langha, on account of misconduct. According to the learned counsel, the registration of the present case is only to pressurize the petitioner for withdrawal of the application moved by him. It is further contended that the offence under section 506, P.P.C. Is not made out whereas remaining offences under sections 186, 188, 288 and 353, P.P.C. Are punishable with lesser punishment and are bailable while section 452, P.P.C. Has been wrongly added in order to bring the case of the petitioner within the ambit of non-available offence. It is further contended that some application was got prepared and signed by said Mr. Nazir Ahmad Langha, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge under pressure from Muhammad Jamil Stenographer, whereon two orders were passed on 24-5-2002 and 1-6-2002. It is further contended that Rana Altaf whose name is mentioned in F.I.R. Having taken the petitioner out of the chamber of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/complainant in his statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. Has not supported that the petitioner had misbehaved the learned Judge. It is further contended that this casts serious doubt in the prosecution case. It is further contended that the F.I.R. Has been got lodged in mala fide manner and 15 Advocates have shown affidavits in favour of petitioner, whereas civil revision against the aforesaid judgment is pending in this Court while the matter of inquiry against the Stenographer was regarding the same issue and the petitioner would have been aggrieved by the findings of Inquiry Officer as well. It is further contended that the offences do not fall within the prohibitory clause and bail can be granted as a matter of right. He relies on Syed Ali Asghar Shah v. The State 1988 PCr.LJ 270 .
3. On the other hand learned State counsel has opposed this petition on the ground that the grounds taken by the learned counsel for the petitioner can be considered in a case of bail after arrest but the petitioner has failed to make out a case for bail before arrest. Serious allegations have been levelled against the petitioner and he is not entitled to the extraordinary, relief as by his conduct he has shown disrespect to the Courts and thus, is not entitled to the grant of bail before arrest, which application may be dismissed.
4. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record carefully. Mr. Muhammad Rashid Qamar, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sialkot was conducting the inquiry against an employee of the Sessions Court. The petitioner had no connection or the concern to interfere in such proceedings and his presence in the Chamber of the learned Additional District Judge Mr. Muhammad Rashid Qamar is established through his own statement given in writing by him during the investigation and by the statements of other Advocates including the statement of Rana Altaf, Advocate. The petitioner in his statement has taken a stand that as he was to be affected from the inquiry proceedings hence he had gone to the Chamber of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge for holding of inquiry by him in the open Court. The inquiry proceedings against an employee were being conducted regarding the matters relating to the terms and conditions of his service and the petitioner had intervened in the said inquiry proceedings. He had no lawful right to do the same or to enter in the Chamber of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mr. Muhammad Rashid Qamar, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, prima facie, has no grudge or enmity against the petitioner to falsely implicate him while leveling serious allegations of misconduct on his part and showing of disrespect to the Courts. It has been established on the record by the statements of the complainant and the other witnesses that the petitioner prima facie is guilty of offences under sections 506/452 ,P.P.C. With other offences mentioned in this petition. Bail before arrest is meant to protect the innocent citizens if the accused succeeds in demonstrating the mala fides on the part of the prosecution or the complainant coupled with the grounds available under section 497, Cr.P.C. For grant of bail to an accused .Person. The petitioner admittedly has failed to show any mala fides on the part of Mr. Muhammad Rashid Qamar, learned District and Sessions Judge, Sialkot and has shown disrespect to the Courts by entering in the Chamber of the learned Judge for interference in the matter in which the petitioner was not even a party and gave abuses to the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge and also threatened him thus he is not entitled to any extraordinary relief by way of grant of bail before arrest.
5. For the foregoing reasons this petition has no merit and is dismissed.