ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Crl. Bail Appln. No.S-78 of 2018.

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF HON’BLE JUDGE

1. For orders on office objection ‘A’

2. For Hearing of Bail Application.

04.05.2018.

                   Mr. Muhammad Afzal Jagirani, advocate for the applicant.

                   Mr. Shakeel Ahmed Ansari, advocate for the complainant.

                   Mr. Shamsuddin Kanher, A.P.G.

                                                -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-

Amjad Ali Sahito, J- Through this bail application, applicant Abrar Hussain @ Raja son of Irshad @ Mithal seeks post arrest bail in case Crime No.10 of 2017 registered at Police Station Lakhigate, District Shikarpur, for offences under section 365-B, 452, 34, PPC, after his bail plea has been declined by the learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-V, Shikarpur vide order dated 15.01.2018.

2.                Brief facts of the prosecution case are that complainant Haji Qadir Bux Soomro lodged FIR at Police Station Lakhigate, District Shikarpur on 16.03.2017 alleging therein that his daughter Mst.Rizwana aged about 17 years is unmarried. On 16.12.2016, he and his sons Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Akram were available in his house. It was 04:00 p.m, they saw and identified accused Raja son of not known, by caste Khunharo, Irfan, Manthar both sons of Khuda Bux by caste Soomro and one unidentified person entered in his house. On coming accused took out TT pistols from their folds and aimed upon them and asked to keep quiet. It is further alleged in the FIR that accused Raja Kunharo put hands upon his daughter Mst. Rizwana to abduct her for committing zina or marriage. Due to fear, the complainant party remained silent. Thereafter all the accused abducted complainant’s daughter Mst. Rizwana and boarded in the Car parked in the street and ran away. Thereafter, the complainant after consulting with his nekmard got registered the FIR to the above effect.

3.                Learned counsel for the applicant has mainly contended that both the eyewitnesses of the incident are sons of complainant hence they are interested and setup witnesses; that there is inordinate and unexplained delay of about three months in lodging the FIR, for which no plausible explanation has been furnished by the complainant party; that report of chemical examiner shows that human semen was not detected in external and internal vaginal cotton swab and considering this aspect of the case it could easily be imagined that no zina has been committed with the alleged abductee. Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that the complainant has sworn affidavit exonerating accused Irfan and Manthar Ali alias Ghulam Rasool, who have been granted bail after arrest and bail before arrest respectively by the learned trial Court and the case of the present applicant is identical to the case of accused Irfan and Manthar Ali alias Ghulam Rasool. He therefore, prays that the applicant may be admitted to bail.

4.                Learned Assistant Prosecutor General and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the grant of bail to the applicant on the ground that the name of the applicant is shown in the FIR and he kidnapped the young lady of 17 years for committing zina with her, hence he is not entitled for the concession of bail.

5.                I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned Assistant Prosecutor General and have gone though the record with their assistance.

6.                Perusal of FIR reflects that the incident has taken place on 16.12.2016 and the matter was reported with the police on 16.03.2017 with the delay of three months, for which no plausible explanation has been furnished by the complainant party for such inordinate delay. Furthermore, the report of Chemical Examiner shows that human semen was not detected in external and internal vaginal cotton swab. Co-accused Manthar Ali alias Ghulam Rasool and Irfan have been enlarged on bail by the learned trial Court on the basis of affidavits sworn by the complainant in which complainant has exonerated them from the commission of alleged offence. In these circumstances, case of the present applicant needs thorough probe and I am of the considered view that case of the applicant falls well within the ambit of sub section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and applicant/accused, namely, Abrar Hussain @ Raja is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees. One hundred thousand only) with P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

Judge

M.Y.Panhwar/**