1. ' FARRUKH ZIA G. SHAIKH, J.---Applicants Hussain. Bakhsh, Ghulam Qadir and Abdul Khaliq all by caste Lashari have filed this application under sections 497/ 498, Cr.P.C. Seeking bail, who are wanted in F.I.R. Crime No,160 of 2007 registered at Police Station, Mirwah District Khairpur for an offence under section 365-B, P.P.C.
2. ' In a nutshell, the brief facts are that case was initiated on an F.I.R. Lodged by Complainant Sarang Khaskehli on 19-7-2007 alleging therein that about two years back he got his daughter Mst. Rehana married with Ali Muhammad Khaskheli r/o District Sanghar. About two weeks earlier to instant incident, she had come to his house for visitation purpose. On 16-7-2007 complainant, his brother Rajib Ali and Manzoor Ali and other inmates of the house were sleeping in the house. At 2330 hours they woke-up on the commotions and found six armed persons standing inside the house whereas two armed persons were standing at the outer door of his house to whom the complainant party identified on the light of bulbs to be each Ahmed Khan, Sikandar, Hussain Bux son of Sher and two unidentified persons with guns whereas Hussain Bux son of Allah Wadhayo, Ghulam Qadir with Pistols while Abdul Khaliq with hatchet. All the accused while pointing their weapons towards complainant party asked them to keep quiet. It is alleged that thereafter accused Ahmed Khan and Sikandar dragged Mst. Rehana whereas accused Hussain Bux and Ghulam Qadir dragged another daughter of complainant namely Mst. Tahmeeza aged about 14/15 years and went out side of the house. On their cries P.Ws. Ali Murad, Shahnawaz and other villagers attracted there who also saw and identified the accused. Thereafter all the accused forcibly took away both daughters of the complainant in a white color pickup. Hence the F.I.R. Was lodged.
3. ' Mr. Ellahi Bux Jamali, learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicants argued that there is a three days delay in lodging of an F.I.R. While distance of police station from the place of incident is only 13/14 kilometers. He further argued that one alleged abductee Mst. Rehana has contracted marriage with her own accord and free-will with one Ahmed Khan (co-accused) whereas another abductee Mst. Tahmeeza has not been abducted by the present applicants and a false case has been registered against the applicants. He also argued that P.Ws. Ali Murad and Muhammad Ismail have filed their affidavits wherein they have stated that no such incident has taken place as alleged by complainant. Lastly he also further argued that co-accused Ahmed Khan has been granted bail before arrest by, the trial Court as such present applicants are also entitled to be enlarged on bail.
4. ' On the other hand Mr. Agha Ather Hussain, Assistant A.G. Appearing on behalf of State, vehemently opposed this application. While defending the State, he argued that one abductee Mst. Tahmeeza in her statement recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. Has fully implicated applicants levelling allegation of Zina against them, which is also supported by the positive report of Chemical Examiner, therefore, they do not deserve any concession.
5. ' I have heard the arguments of learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicants as well as learned Asstt. A.G. Appearing on behalf of State and with their assistance I have also perused the material available on record.
6. ' It is clear from the contents of an F.I.R. That Mst. Rehana and Mst. Tahmeeza (daughters of complainant) are said to have been abducted by present applicants in company of other co- accused from the house. It appears from the Nikahnama dated 17-7-2007, statement dated 23-7- 2007 and free-will affidavit of Mst. Rehana placed on record, that she being unmarried, contracted marriage with co-accused Ahmed Khan with her own freewill and on that ground co-accused.
7. Ahmed Khan has been granted bail before arrest by the trial Court, but as far as the abduction of Mst. Tahmeeza (another daughter of complainant), is concerned, it is crystal clear from the record that after the incident, she has appeared before the police and her statements under sections 161 and 164, Cr.P.C. Have been recorded, in which she has fully implicated present applicants levelling allegation of Zina against them, which is also supported by the report of Chemical Examiner. So far as three days' delay in lodging of an F.I.R., is concerned, in such cases, delay can not be considered as fatal to the prosecution case because the A family honor is involved, therefore, at the first instance, the people usually make efforts to recover their victims and avoid from going to police station. No case for bail is made out as there is a sufficient material available on record against the present applicants.
8. ' Consequently, this Bail Application is dismissed along with listed application.
9. ' These are the reasons of my short' order dated 17-10-2008 whereby I had dismissed this Bail Application.