The petitioner F.aiz Bakhsh seeks/post arrest bail in case FIR No,9/2009 dated 22.3.2009 offence under Sections 496-A, 376/371-B PPC registered at Police Station Sadar, District Multan.
2. The allegation against, the petitioner is- that he purchased Mst. Nasreen in consideration of Rs,60,000/- from unknown person and committed "zina" with her.
3. It is inter alia contended that Mst. Nasreen, the alleged abductee is wife of the petitioner and performing her marital obligations by residing in his house. Further submits that as a result of wedlock between the petitioner and his spouse the alleged abductee a son namely Rashid aged about 1 1/2 years has also born. Registration of this case is tainted with malice and mala fide of the complainant as well as local police. Adds that if the contents of FIR are read in juxta position with facts enumerated in this petition no offence as alleged is made out. That the petitioner is behind the bars for the last two months. The first information report was lodged with the delay of three years and infact the petitioner after getting divorce from her earlier husband contracted marriage with the petitioner with the consent of the complainant and now with a view to black mail the petitioner for ulterior motives have got registered the case in hand. During this period of more than three years not even a single complaint was lodged either with the police or any other authority regarding the alleged abduction of Mst. Nasreen Wife of the petitioner. He therefore, prays for post arrest bail.
3. Conversely learned Deputy Prosecutor General opposes this petition and submits that the statement of alleged abductee was recorded on 24.3.2009 under Section 161 Cr.P.C. who has implicated the present petitioner by supporting the version of the complainant.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. There is unexplained delay of about more than three years in lodging the FIR. The petitioner claims to be the husbands of the alleged abductee. Out of the wedlock there is a minor son. It is an admitted fact that no complaint whatsoever was lodged either by the complainant or so called previous husband of the alleged abductee nor any petition was moved either before this Court or the learned Justice of Peace or the Judicial Magistrate.
6. After hearing the arguments and minute examination of record, the submissions made at bar by learned counsel for the petitioner appears to have force. The story as narrated in the FIR at least prima facie seems to be an after thought and it appears to be a family dispute. The petitioner thus in my considered view has made out a case of further inquiry within the ambit of Section 497 Cr.P.C. Resultantly this application is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. With these observations this petition stands disposed of.