' MUHAMMAD ALAM KHAN, J.--- Sohail son of Shakirullah, resident of Zando Dheri, Mardan, presently residing at Bara Banda, Tehsil and District Nowshera, seeks bail in case F.I.R. No,743 dated 21-8- 2007, Police Station Shahbaz Garhi, under section 365-B, P. P .0 .
2. Briefly narrated the facts of the case are that on 21-8-2007 at 5-00 hours Mumtaz son of Dalair aged about 65/66 years resident o Zando Dheri, reported the matter to the Police Officer who was of "Gasht", who recorded the Murasila. The contents of the Murasila reads as under:--- ' That Mst. Aalia daughter of Mumtaz, aged about 25/26 years who is major and had been engaged to Ikramullah son of Shakirullah resident of Zando Dheri, presently residing at Bara Banda, Tehsil and District Nowshera. The said Ikramullah had oftenly brought elders of the locality for the marriage ceremony of Mst. Aalia. As Ikramullah had contracted a second marriage, thus, the complainant used to refuse. On the day of occurrence the complainant was present in the mosque preparing himself for "Fajar" prayers; that one Musafir near neighbourer of complainant informed him that Mst. Aalia daughter of the complainant had eloped with Ikramullah for the purpose of marriage. When the complainant went to his house, he verified this fact from Mst. Muslima, his wife, who confirmed that Ikramullah with the help of Sohail his brother, Shakirullah son of Noongeen, father of Ikramullah, had persuaded Mst. Aalia and had abducted her. The eye-witnesses were stated to be the women folk of the house.
3. On the basis of this Murasila, F.I.R. No,743 dated 21-8-2007 was registered. The petitioner moved an application to Abdul Majid, Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, who vide his order, dated 26-10-2007 rejected the same. The petitioner then moved an application before Miss Mah Tallat, Additional Sessions Judge-II, Mardan, who vide order, dated 24-11-2007 rejected the same. Sohail petitioner has moved the instant bail application requesting for his release on bail.
4. Farhad, relative of the petitioner has submitted detailed written arguments, placed on record. It was submitted that the allegations in the F.I.R. Reveals that it is not a case of abduction rather it is a case of elopement. Elaborating the arguments, it was next submitted that bare perusal of the F.I.R.
Would reveal that when the first information was conveyed by one Musafir, neighbourer of the complainant, it was stated that Mst. Aalia had gone with Ikramullah for the purpose of marriage.
She being sui juris aged about 25/26 years, as mentioned in the F.I.R., thus, was a free and major girl. She had already been engaged to Ikramullah and thus, has gone with him of her own free will.
It was also submitted that though she has gone with Ikramullah from a thickly populated village but neither she has resisted nor any lethal weapon was used for the commission of the alleged offence. It was also submitted that the accused being a government servant is behind the bar for the last four and a half months.
5. It was also submitted that pronouncements of the superior Court as embodied in the law declared, is very much clear that in such-like cases Courts have tentatively assessed data available on record, in order to determine, whether the allegations contained in the F.I.R. Constitute an offence of abduction or make out the case of elopement. In such-like cases when there is no allegation of rape, use of force and when the accused is arrested and interrogated but nothing is recovered from the accused by the prosecution, normally bail is granted as held in the case of Ghulam Nabi and others v. State and another 1984 PCr.LJ 675 and Peeran Ditta v. The State 1983 PCr.LJ 195.
6. Learned counsel for the complainant has sent a ruling of the Lahore High Court reported in 1987 M LD 3100 and on the strength of this authority the Clerk of the learned counsel contended that the age of alleged abductee when below 15 years and she has not been recovered, being detained illegally. In such-like situation, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail.
7. Mr. Muhammad Saeed Khan Shangla, Additional Advocate-General for the State submitted that the accused-petitioner has been charged in the F.I.R. His two co-accused namely Ikramullah and his father Shakirullah are still at large and further more the abductee has not been recovered thus, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. The learned two Courts below have rightly refused the concession of bail to the petitioner. Relied on the case of Muhammad Akbar v. The State 1987 M LD 3125.
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the facts of the present case and have gone through the record of the case with the assistance of the learned Advocate-General. A bare perusal of the F.I.R. Reveals that the age of the alleged abductee has been admitted to be 25/26 years. This fact has also been admitted that she was engaged to Ikramullah which will be determined by the trial Court to be one of elopement or abduction. At this stage without commenting upon the merits of the case so that it may not prejudice the case of either prosecution or defence. Suffice it to say that the petitioner has made out a case for further inquiry which is discrenible from the facts and circumstances of the instant case.
' Resultantly, this bail application is accepted. Sohail petitioner is ordered to be released on bail provided he furnished bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (one hundred thousands) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa Judicial Magistrate, who shall see that the sureties are local and men of means. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.