ORDER SHEET
----------------------------------------------------
Date Order with signature of Judge
----------------------------------------------------
FOR HEARING
------------
13.04.2009
----------
Mr. Muhammad Hanif
Qureshi, advocate for the applicant alongwith the applicant.
Mr. Saleem Akhtar
Buriro, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh for the State.
Alleged abductee
Muhammad Imran son of Abdul Salam is present in Court.
*******
By this application under Section 498, Cr.P.C., applicant Sadiq Mengal son of Hasil Khan is seeking interim pre-arrest bail in Crime No.104/2008, Police Station Garden, Saddar Town, Karachi. In this crime applicant and other accused have been charged with the allegation of commission of offence punishable under Sections 365 and 34, PPC.
2. As per contents of the F.I.R., lodged by one Shakir, on 30.05.2008 between 7:00 and 8:00 a.m. applicant and some other persons have abducted Imran from his shop for which such complaint was lodged on the next day. Record reveals that the alleged abductee had reached at his house after more than two weeks of the incident, whereafter his statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C. was got recorded by the police, as reproduced in the order of the trial Court dated 05.09.2008, rejecting the pre-arrest bail application of the applicant.
3. Today, the alleged abductee has appeared before the Court and reiterated the contents of his affidavit filed in Court on 23.01.2009, totally exonerating the applicant’s involvement in the commission of crime of his abduction.
4. Mr. Saleem Akhtar, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh making reference to 164, Cr.P.C. statement of the alleged abductee and his affidavit filed before this Court, submits that such statement of abductee Imran exonerating the applicant from commission of crime, makes out a clear case of further enquiry about the involvement of the applicant in the commission of crime and further the possibility of his mala-fide involvement in the crime also cannot be ruled out. He, therefore, submits that he has no objection if the interim pre-arrest bail allowed to the applicant is confirmed.
5. After careful examination of submissions made by the learned counsel and perusal of record, I find the applicant is entitled for confirmation of pre-arrest bail allowed to him vide order dated 28.11.2008, as the star witness of the incident, the alleged abductee Imran, is not supporting the case of prosecution against the present applicant.
6. This being the position, interim pre-arrest bail allowed to the applicant vide order dated 28.11.2008 is confirmed in the same terms.
CHIEF JUSTICE