IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No.S-616 of 2021.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

For hearing of bail application.

O R D E R.

27-01-2022.

Applicants/accused Lutuf Ali @ Lutfufullah and Tasveer Ahmed both bycaste Narejo in person.

Mr. Ali Dad Narejo, advocate for complainant.

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, APG for the State.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., Through the instant application, applicants/accused Lutuf Ali @ Lutfufullah and Tasveer Ahmed both bycaste Narejo seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 53/2021, offence u/s 365-B, 371-A, 34 PPC registered at police station Khuhra, District Khairpur. Prior to this, the applicants filed such application for grant of pre-arrest bail, but the same was turned down by learned IV-Additional Sessions Judge Khairpur vide order dated 02-09-2021, hence this bail application. Both the above named applicants/accused are present on interim pre-arrest bail, but their counsel is called absent, hence they are directed to proceed their bail application.

2. The details and particulars of the FIR are already available in the bail application and FIR, same could be gathered from the copy of FIR attached with such application, hence, needs not to reproduce the same hereunder.

3. Applicants/accused submit that they are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case by the complainant with mala fide intentions and ulterior motives due to matrimonial dispute; that there is inordinate delay of about 04 days in lodging the FIR and such delay has not been explained by the complainant; that applicants/accused have pleaded malafide on the part of complainant to falsely involve him over the matrimonial dispute; that the alleged abductee Mst. Sania after swearing free will affidavit has contracted marriage with Dodal Shahani on her own accord; after grant of interim pre-arrest, they have joined the investigation and they have not misused the concession of interim pre-arrest bail, therefore, they pray for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail.

4. On the other hand learned APG for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant have opposed for grant of pre-arrest bail to the applicants/accused on the ground that they are involved in heinous offence of abduction of a girl.

5. I have heard the applicants, learned APG for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and have gone through the material available on record.

6. Admittedly, the FIR is lodged with the delay of about two days and such delay has not been explained by the complainant. Perusal of record reflects that after swearing the free will affidavit, the alleged abductee Mst. Sania has contracted marriage with one Dodal Shahani, such free will affidavit and Nikahanama of Mst. Sania are available page Nos. 45 and 47 of the instant bail application. The perusal of statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C of the alleged abductee available at page No. 49 reveals that she has contracted marriage without any fear and coercion and she wants to go along with her husband and mother in law. It reflects that the alleged abductee has contracted marriage on her own accord. No allegation of Zina is attributed against the applicants/accused, hence the ingredients of section 371-A PPC are lacking in the instant case. The applicants/accused have also pleaded malafide on the part of complainant to falsely involve them over matrimonial dispute. The case has been challaned and applicants/accused are no more required for further investigation.

7. In view of above discussion, the applicants/accused have made out a good case for confirmation of bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC, hence the instant bail application is allowed and interim pre arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused is confirmed on same terms and condition. Learned trial Court is at liberty to take action against the applicants/accused, if they misuse the concession of bail.

8. Needless to mention that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant on merits.

J U D G E

Nasim/P.A