BASHIR AHMAD Versus THE STATE

ORDER

Petitioner Bashir Ahmad is arrested for the commission of an offence under section 506 of the P.P.C. on the basis of FA.R. No.2/87 registered an 7-1-1987 at Police Station Bahawalpur Cantt.

2. His plea for post-arrest bail has been declined by a learned Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated 21-1-1987 for the reasons that there are several cases already registered against him whereof he had been acquitted in only four cases and that, if released on bail, he is likely to commit more of such or other offences.

3. It was contended by the petitioner's counsel on the last date that the observation made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in the panultimate paragraph of his order was intended to be made with reference to the co-accused Riaz whose bail application was also taken up simultaneously by the learned Judge and that the petitioner had neither ever been involved in any case nor was he acquitted of any.

4. Today, learned counsel for respondent is assisted by the Investigating Officer and to controvert the above assertion he has mentioned (1) F.. I. R. No.120/86 registered under section 506, P. P. C. (2) F.I.R. No.292/78 registered under section 307/148, P.P.C., (3) F.I.R. No.116/78 under section 324, P.P.C. and (4) F.I.R. No.169/7 under section 448, P. P.C. where in the petitioner is nominated as an accused. After perusing the copies of these F.I.Rs. petitioner advocate has stated that whereas the petitioner has already been acquitted in the cases registered on the basis of the last mentioned two F.I.Rs., the other two cases are still in the process of being tried. Therein he has not only admitted the falsity of the representation made by him to secure admission of this bail application but has also not been able to explain the petitioner's seemingly desperate an reprehensible character. He has also not furnished any plausible explanation for the petitioner's implication in this case. In this situation, I am not pursuaded to take any different view about the petitioner who is alleged in the F.I.R. to have attempted to interfere with the conduct of a case by causing intimidation of aggravated kind.

5. Petitioner does not appear entitled to-the grant of concession of bail. This application is accordingly dismissed.

S. A. /B-19/L Bail refused.