SARWAR MASIH Versus STATE

ORDER

Petitioner Gulzar Hussain seeks bail in a case registered with Police Station Chiniot, District Jhang for an offence under section 420/468/471, P.P.C. vide F.I.R., dated 10-5-1993. The case was got registered by Noor Muhammad against three persons wherein the petitioner was not nominated.

The allegation in the F.I.R. is that one Abdul Rehman and Hazoor Muhammad had enmity with the first informant and criminal as well as civil litigation between the parties was going on. The above-said two persons forged a sale-deed, whereby the agricultural land of the first informant was sold, which was a fake document.

2. It was contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was neither named in the F.I.R. nor had any role to play in the said transaction. Argued that even if the prosecution allegations were accepted, yet the petitioner was not the beneficiary. The contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the State.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the file. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. According to the investigation, the only evidence available against the petitioner is of the petition-writer, according to which the petitioner had asked him to write the sale-deed. This on the face of it requires further probe because the petitioner is not the beneficiary. One of the co-accused of the petitioner had filed a suit for specific performance prior to the registration of the case, which further makes the case of the petitioner doubtful. In the circumstances, the petitioner is allowed bail, provided he furnishes security in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Chiniot, District Jhang.

N.H.Q./G-191/L Bail allowed.