IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Bail Application No. S- 23/2022.

Date of hearing

Order with signature of Judge

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

2. For hearing of bail application.

O R D E R.

27.01.2022.

Mr. Abdul Majeed Memon, Advocate along with applicants/accused.

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar, Additional Prosecutor General.

AMJAD ALI SAHITO J., Through this order, I intend to dispose of pre-arrest bail application filed on behalf of applicants/accused Allah Wadhayo, 2) Abdullah and 3. Bodlo in crime No.210/2021, offence under sections 452, 365-B PPC of Police Station Daharki, District Ghotki. Prior to this, the applicants/accused named above filed such application for grant of pre-arrest bail but the same was turned down by learned Additional Sessions Judge Daharki vide order dated 08.01.2022 hence they have filed instant 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. Learned counsel for applicants submits that applicants/ accused are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that infact Muhammad Shahban son of applicant/accused No.3 Bodlo contracted free will marriage with Mst. Hameeda daughter of complainant as such she has filed W.P No.6474/2021 before Lahore High Court Bahawalpur which annoyed to the complainant and by giving false story lodged FIR against applicants/accused. In support of his contention he has relied upon the affidavit, Nikahnama and copy of writ Petition No. 6474/2021 filed by Mst. Hameeda before Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur available at pages 41 to 45 of the Court File. Lastly counsel for applicants prayed for confirmation of interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused.

4. On the other hand Mr. Muhammad Ayoob Malik, Advocate files power of Mr. Muhammad Tarique Panhwar Advocate on behalf of complainant and requests for adjournment on the ground that Mr. Muhammad Tarique Panhwar Advocate is busy before Ubauro Court, such request for adjournment is declined.

5. Learned Additional P.G present and also confirms the contentions of learned counsel for applicants and submits that alleged abductee has not been recovered from the possession of applicants/accused. In fact complainant has produced the alleged abductee Mst. Haneefa before Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate Daharki where her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C was recorded in which she has stated that all accused persons have abducted his daughter.

6. I have heard learned counsel for applicants, learned Addiitonal P.G and have gone through the material available on record.

7. Admittedly Mst. Hameeda daughter of complainant contracted marriage with Muhammad Shahban son of applicant/accused namely Bodlo and such nikahnama is available in the file. Thereafter said Mst. Hameeda filed Writ Petition No. 6474/2021 before Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur in which she has narrated the entire alleged story, infact which has annoyed the complainant who has implicated the applicants/accused in this case. Further alleged abductee has not been recovered from the possession of applicants/accused to believe that she was abducted by the applicants/accused. Learned counsel for applicants/accused pleaded mala fide on the part of complainant owing to the fact that Mst. Hameeda daughter of complainant has contracted free will marriage with Muhammad Shahban son of applicant/accused No.3 Bodlo and due to such annoyance complainant has lodged false FIR and involved the present applicants/accused hence the case of applicants become one of further enquiry.

8. In view of above discussion, learned counsel for 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 interim pre arrest bail already granted to the applicants/accused Allah Wadhayo, Abdullah and Bodo is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.

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.

10. The bail application stands disposed of in the above terms.

J U D G E

Irfan/P.A