ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Cr. Bail. Appln. No. S – 153 of 2019

Date Order with Signature of Hon’ble Judge

For hearing of bail application

1. For orders on office objection at flag ‘A’

2. For hearing of bail application

(Notice issued)

25.3.2019

Haji Abdul Karim Luhrani Advocate for the Applicant

Syed Sardar Ali Shah, DPG for the State

>>>>>>>…<<<<<<<<

Irshad Ali Shah, J; It is alleged that the applicant with rest of the culprits by committing trespass into the house of complainant Mumtaz Ali abducted his niece Mst. Murad Khatoon with intention to subject her to rape and / or to get her married with someone against her wishes, for that the present case was registered.

2. The applicant on having been refused pre-arrest bail by learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge Naushahro Feroze, has sought for the same from this Court by way of instant bail application under Section 498-A Cr.P.C.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police; there is one day delay in lodgment of the FIR and Mst. Murad Khatoon has married of her own accord with co-accused Gada Hussain. By contending so, he sought for pre-arrest bail for the applicant.

4. Learned DPG for the State and complainant Mumtaz Ali in person have recorded no objection to grant of bail to the applicant. By stating so, an affidavit of the complainant to that effect was also brought on record of the Court.

5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.

6. There is delay of one day in lodgment of the FIR; Mst. Murad Khatoon it is said married of her own accord with co-accused Gada Hussain. Learned DPG for the State and complainant Mumtaz Ali in person have recorded no objection to grant of bail to applicant. It is specifically stated by complainant Mumtaz Ali in his affidavit that the applicant is innocent and his name was disclosed by him before the police under suspicious. In these circumstances, the applicant is found to be entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail on point of malafide.

7. In case of Muhammad Najeeb vs. State (2009 SCMR-448), it has been held by Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan that;

“complainant initially had nominated the accused in the FIR but later-on through an affidavit he has expressed his satisfaction with regard to innocence of the accused, the case of the accused was of further enquiry”.

8. In view of above, interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicant is confirmed on same terms and conditions.

9. Instant Cr. Bail Application is disposed of in above terms.

Judge

ARBROHI