1. ' KHALID ALI Z. QAZI, J.---Dismissed having become infructuous.
(3) Granted subject to all just exceptions.
(4) This bail application has been filed by Mr. Arbab Ali Chandio advocate on behalf of applicants Niaz Ali, Ali Hyder and Muhammad Ismail who are facing trial in F.I.R. No,125 of 2008 registered at Police Station Bhiria City for offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 452, 506/2, 364, P.P.C.
2. ' The brief facts of the prosecution case as per F.I.R. Lodged by complainant Mst. Waziran on 16-7- 2008 at about 1430 hours at Police Station Bhiria City are that she has got her son Wajid Ali alias Jani aged about 10 years and on 9-7-2007 she along with her children and brothers Anwer Ali and Naseer Ahmed, was available in her house and were chit-chatting, when at about 11-00 a.m. Six armed persons entered into her house, who were identified to be co-accused Sahibdino, accused/applicant Gul Hassan and accused/applicant Niaz Ali, both armed with pistol, accused/applicant Ali Hyder, co-accused Gul Hassan and accused/applicant Muhammad Ismail, all armed with pistols, co-accused Khadim having pistol, overpowered upon complainant party and issued threats for keeping silence. It is further mentioned that due to fear of weapons, the complainant party remained silent, as such within their sight, accused/applicant Niaz Ali and co- accused Khadim Ali, dragged her son Wajid Ali alias Jani from his arms and went out side the house and while putting him in a white coloured car, parked out side the house, went away. She further stated that subsequently she complained before the nekmards of the locality, who prevented her not to register F.I.R. Against the accused persons, her son will be returned back to her, hence, she along with the witnesses went to the otaq of accused/applicant Niaz Ali where all the accused persons were available and approached them for return of her son, who assured her that her son will be returned back and thereafter they kept her on false hopes but did not return her son back. It is further allege that subsequent all the accused refused to return her son and further threatened that her son will be murdered, hence she again approached the nakmards of the locality, who too refused on the ground that the accused persons were not attending him properly, hence, she finding no other way, moved such application for registration of the F.I.R., subsequently her F.I.R. Was registered as mentioned above.
3. ' After registration of F.I.R., police conducted usual investigation and after completing all the legal formalities, the case was challane before the Additional Sessions Judge Feroze, wherein accused/ applicant Niaz Ali was shown in custody, while remaining accused/ applicants Ali Hyder and Muhammad Ismail along with co-accused Khadim and Sahibdino were shown as absconders, out of whom, both present accused/applicants Ali Hyder and Muhammad Ismail joined in the present proceedings Khadim and now are confined at Central Prison-I Sukkur.
4. ' The bail application was earlier moved in the learned trial court but the same was dismissed vide order dated 1-11-2008.
5. ' I have heard Mr. Arbab Ali Chandio learned advocate for the applicants, Mr. Illahi Bux Jamali learned advocate for the complainant, Mr. Agha Athar Hussain learned A.A.-G. And perused the record.
6. ' Learned advocate for the applicants submits that the case against the present applicants/accused is false, fabricated one, foisted by the complainant due to enmity over the matrimonial affairs, the case was lodged against the applicants after due deliberation and consultation with mala tide intention. He further added that ingredients of section 364, P.P.C. Are not properly made out and that there is delay of more than one year in lodging of F.I.R. Learned counsel vehemently contended that applicant/accused Ali Hyder is real father of alleged abductee and also husband of complainant and applicant/accused Ismail is real uncle and also brother of co-accused Ali Hyder and due to enmity between husband and wife over the matrimonial affairs between the parties, this false case has been registered against them. He further submits that applicant/accused Ali Hyder being a real father of alleged abductee has published such publications for search of his son Wajid alias Jani. Learned counsel submits that the father cannot abduct his son and detained in his custody because the father is natural guardian of the minor. He further submit that during investigation police has not recorded statement under section 161, Cr.P.C.
7. Of nekmards of locality for returning of the abductee Wajid alias Jani as complainant stated in her F.I.R. That she went to the nekmard, it creates doubt.
8. ' Learned advocate for the complainant opposed the grant of bail to the applicants/accused on the ground that their names have specifically been mentioned in the F.I.R. With specific active role of participating in the commission of the offence, which took place during broad day hours even it was supported by the eye-witnesses while recording their respective statements during the course of investigation, hence none of them is entitled for the concession of bail.
9. ' The learned A.A.-G. On his usual fairness has conceded the grant of bail and stated that he will not oppose the application strongly under the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
10. ' I have heard the learned advocates for the parties and perused the record carefully.
11. ' In view of facts and circumstances of the case without going into deeper appreciation of evidence and on tentative assessm ent I am of the humble view that this is a case of further enquiry regarding the involvement of applicant Ali Haider who is real father of alleged abductee Wajid Ali alias Jani and so also involvement of applicant Ismail who is real brother of applicant Ali Haider and uncle of abductee. Therefore, the case falls under the category of further enquiry as envisaged under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
12. ' Under the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I admit the applicants to bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs,100,000 (rupees One Hundred Thousand only) each with