IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail Application No.S-755 of 2021.

Date	Order with signature of Judge

Applicants: Applicants/accused are called absent.

Through: Mr.Alam Sher Bozdar, Advocate.

The State: Through Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, Additional Prosecutor General along with Inspector Imamuddin SHO Police Station Ghotki.

Date of hearing. 13.01.2022.

Date of decision. 13.01.2022.

O R D E R.

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

AMJAD Ali SAHITO, J.- Through the instant Crl. Bail Application, applicants/accused named above seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No. 317/2021, offence u/s 452, 365-B, 364, 506/2 PPC registered at police Station ‘A’ Section Ghotki. Prior to this applicants/accused filed pre arrest bail application, which was dismissed by learned I-Additional Sessions Judge (MCTC) Ghotki vide order dated 24-11-2021, hence he filed the instant Bail Application.

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

3. Learned counsel for the applicants/accused contends that applicants/accused are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case due to enmity with the complainant. He further contended that the FIR is delayed for about 12 days, no plausible explanation has been furnished; that no any injury has been attributed to any of the applicants/accused to believe that they have committed the alleged offence. He further contended that after recovery of the alleged detenue she has not deposed against the applicants/accused nor any injury received by her on the body at the hands of applicants/accused, therefore case of the applicants/accused require further inquiry and he prays for confirmation of interim pre arrest bail.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for complainant as well as learned Additional P.G vehemently opposed for grant of bail and submit that the stamp vendor has given affidavit stating that neither the complainant appeared before him nor obtained any stamp paper form him, infact Syed Hassan Shah (Applicant/accused No.1) has taken stamp paper from him on the pretext that they will write the faisla on the said stamp paper. Lastly prayed that applicants/accused are very much involved in the commission of offence and they are not entitled for concession of bail.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.

6. From the perusal of record, it appears that the names of applicants/accused transpire in the FIR with specific role that on the date of incident all accused persons with common intention duly armed with deadly weapons entered into the house of complainant and forcibly abducted Mst. Tasleem and Mst. Hidayat Khatoon and detained them at unknown place. During course of investigation police has recovered Mst. Tasleem from the possession of accused persons as such her statement was recorded in which she has supported the version of complainant and implicated the applicants/ accused in the commission of offence. The delay of lodgment of FIR has been plausibly explained by the complainant that after the incident he approached to Police Station for registration but police has refused to register his FIR as such he has filed an application under section 22-A, B Cr.P.C, same was allowed and thereafter he has lodged the FIR without any delay. At bail stage only tentative assessment is to be made and nothing has been brought on record to show any ill-will or malafide on the part of the complainant, which is requirement for grant of pre-arrest bail. All the P.Ws have supported the version of complainant as such sufficient material is available on the record against the applicants/accused to connect them with the alleged offences. In this regard, I am fortified with the case law of Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan [2019 S C M R 1129] wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has held as under:-

''Grant of pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary remedy in criminal jurisdiction; it is diversion of usual course of law, arrest in cognizable cases; a protection to the innocent being hounded on trump up charges through abuse of process of law, therefore a petitioner seeking judicial protection is required to reasonably demonstrate that intended arrest is calculated to humiliate him with taints of mala fide; it is not a substitute for post arrest bail in every run of the mill criminal case as it seriously hampers the course of investigation----the principles of judicial protection are being faithfully adhered to till date, therefore, grant of pre-arrest bail essentially requires considerations of malafide, ulterior motive or abuse of process of law."

7. In view of above, learned counsel for the applicants/accused failed to make out a good case for grant of pre-arrest bail in the light of sub section (2) of Section 497 CrPC. In such circumstances, the instant Crl. bail Application stands dismissed and interim order dated 25.11.2021 earlier granted to the applicants/accused is hereby recalled.

8. Alleged detenue Mst. Tasleem after her recovery has been brought before this Court by the concerned SHO and states that she wants to go along with her father. She is allowed to go and reside with her father.

9. 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 applicants on merits.

Judge

Irfan/P.A