MUHAMMAD RAF QUE Versus STATE

ORDER

Petitioners seek bail in a case registered against them with Police Station City, Daska, for an offence under section 420/467/468/471, P.P.0 The case was got registered by Chiragh Din against Muhammad Rafique Shafaqat All, his son and grandson respectively, with the allegation that he wa s owner of 20 Kanals of land. Petitioners committed theft of his identity-card a nd thereafter produced one Nizam-ud-Din before the authority and prepared a forged Power of Attorney of the first informant.. On the basis of the said forg ed power of attorney petitioner No.1, transferred the land of his father in favour of petitioner No.2, his son.

It was contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the case against them is absolutely false. Complainant had given power of attorney. Now he has backed out and disowned the same. Submitted that even otherwise the investigation is complete and the petitioner is not required for the said purpose, therefore, may be allowed bail. Contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant.

2. I have heard the learned counsel and gone through the file. The case was got registered by the first informant against his real son and grandson. There is no reason, prima facie, to disbelieve the allegations levelled by the first informant. Questioned power of attorney was sent to the Handwriting Expert whose opinion is that the signatures of the first informant have been forged. Even otherwise allegations contained in the F.I.R. petitioners have deceitfully cheated and deprived their own father and grandfather respectively of his property. No ground for bail is made out. Petition fails which is dismissed.

N.H.Q./M-1682/L ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail refused.