ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH CIRCUIT COURT LARKANO
1st Cr. Bail Application No. S-530 of 2023
Applicants: Lal Bux @ Guloo Dahot & another through Mr. Ghulam Shabir Jatoi, Advocate.
The State: Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. Prosecutor General.
Complainant: Through Mr. Gulshan R. Dayo, Advocate.
Date of hearing : 04.12.2023
Date of order : 04.12.2023
O R D E R.
Muhammad Saleem Jessar, J.- Applicants Lal Bux alias Guloo son of Ahmed Ali @ Ahmed and Qurban Ali son of Lal Bux, both by caste, Dahot, seek pre-arrest bail in Crime No.63/2023 of PS Badeh, u/s 393-A, 396-A & B, 34, PPC. Their plea for pre-arrest bail was declined by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Larkana vide separate orders dated 16.08.2023.
2. Per prosecution case, on 02.07.2023, the applicants along with co-accused Khuda Bux Dahot, being armed with pistols, abducted Mst. Fozia, wife of complainant Nasrullah from his house.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that applicant Qurban Ali has married with alleged abductee Mst. Fozia and the complainant Nasrullah being her previous husband has got registered instant case with delay of about one month; hence, the case against the applicants requires further enquiry and prays for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail granted earlier to the applicants.
4. Learned Addl. P.G. submits that abductee Mst. Fozia is the wedded wife of complainant and out of said wedlock she had given birth to five children, who are in the custody of complainant, but the applicants on the force of deadly weapons have abducted her. He further submits that the offence with which the applicants are charged carries maximum punishment, therefore, they are not entitled for bail. He further submits that the case has been challaned, which is now pending before the Court of II-Judicial Magistrate, Dokri for preliminary proceedings.
5. Mr. Gulshan R. Dayo, learned Counsel for the complainant, opposes the bail application and submits that alleged abductee Mst. Fozia has performed Nikah over Nikah and the applicants being outlaws have abducted her in presence of her previous husband as well as her children, therefore, they are not entitled for bail. He further submits that the alleged abductee had filed Family Suit No.333/2023 against complainant Nasrullah before the Court of Family Judge, Larkana, seeking dissolution of her marriage by way of khulla, which was dismissed in default on 08.8.2023; hence her previous Nikah stands proved, besides dissolution of such Nikah has not been brought on record by the applicants/accused, therefore, they are not entitled for bail; hence, submits that by dismissing instant bail application they may be taken in custody.
6. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants, learned Addl. P.G. for the State as well as learned Counsel for the complainant, and perused the record.
7. The applicants are undeniably nominated in the FIR and specific role of abducting on gunpoint the wife of complainant, namely, Mst. Fozia, who is also a mother of five children, is assigned to the applicants. So far delay in lodgment of FIR is concerned, it is by now well settled that delay per se is no ground for grant of bail to accused. Even otherwise, the delay in such kind of cases, which involve the honour and dignity of a family man, is not only natural but is also of no consequence, for the simple reason that in this part of the country the people, particularly in rural areas, instead of inviting and involving the police prefer to get the issue resolved privately by approaching their nekmard/headman. Moreover, the FIR was lodged by the complainant after obtaining orders from the Court; hence, the delay, if any, appears to be justifiably explained. It is also important to mention here that on query of the Court, applicant/accused Qurban Ali has admitted shamelessly and without any remorse that alleged abductee Mst.Fozia is in his custody. Such his statement is sufficient to connect the applicants/ accused to connect them with the commission of alleged offence, coupled with the fact that the offence, with which the applicants are charged, carries maximum punishment.
8. Upshot of the above discussion is that the applicants do not deserve the extraordinary concession of pre-arrest bail. Accordingly, instant bail application is dismissed and the interim pre-arrest bail granted to them earlier is hereby recalled. They are taken in custody and remanded to jail. Office to send such intimation to the concerned Court/Magistrate, where the case is said to be pending for formal proceedings.
9. The concerned Jail Superintendent shall ensure that the custody of the accused is produced before the trial Court on each and every date of hearing, so as to enable the trial Court to proceed with the trial expeditiously and conclude it as early as possible.
JUDGE
Qazi Tahir/*