SARDAR MUHAMMAD SHAMIM KHAN, J.---Yasir Ali, petitioner seeks his pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him vide case F.I.R. No.581 of 2010 dated 29-8-2010 for the offences under sections 365-B, 380 and 376, of P.P.C. Registered at Police Station City Burewala, District Vehari.
2. According to F.I.R. Yasir Ali, petitioner had developed illicit relations with Mst. Uzma Sakhawat. On 27-8-2010 at about 2-00 p.m. Mst. Uzma Sakhawat was alone in her house, when Mst. Ambreen co- accused of the petitioner enticed away Mst. Uzma Sakhawat in order to proceed to City. When Mst.
Ambreen and Mst. Uzma Sakhawat came in the street, Yasir Ali (petitioner) and co-accused Asif Ali and Saeed were available there in a car and took Mst. Uzma Sakhawat along with them in the said Car. When mother of Mst. Uzma Sakhawat returned back at her house in the evening, Mst. Uzma Sakhawat was not available there. On search Yasin and Abdul Ghafoor P.Ws. Informed them that petitioner and other accused persons along with Mst. Uzma Sakhawat were seen proceeding towards city in a car. It is further alleged in the F.I.R. That accused persons also took along with them golden ornaments weighing 19-tolas and cash Rs.54,000.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was an extraordinary delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R.; that from the contents of the F.I.R. No offence under section 365-B of P.P.C. Was made out against the petitioner; that in fact Mst. Uzma Sakhawat out of her own free will contracted marriage with Yasir Ali, petitioner on 27-8-2010; that on 28-8-2010 Mst. Uzma Sakhawat also sworn an affidavit wherein she contended that she was not abducted by any body and out of her own free-will she left the house of her parents and contracted marriage with Yasir Ali, petitioner. This affidavit has been duly attested by oath commissioner; that after registration of F.I.R.
Mst. Uzma Sakhawat filed a writ petition vide Diary No.74646-2010 in the Hon'ble Lahore High Court, Lahore against the S.H.O. Police Station Said Wala, District Nankana Sahib, S.H.O. Police Station City Burewala and her father Sakhawat Ali contending therein that petitioner (Mst. Uzma Sakhawat) being sui juris contracted marriage with Yasir Ali on 27-8-2010 against the wishes of her parents and after the marriage she started residing with Yasir Ali as his wife and that respondents Nos.1 and 2 are causing undue harassm ent to her and threatening her to get divorce from her husband, at the instance of respondent No.3, her father; that Mst. Uzma Sakhawat and Yasir Ali (petitioner) jointly filed a Writ Petition No.9686 of 2010 before this Court wherein both petitioners contended that they entered into marriage contract with their own freewill on 27-8-2010 and that as the parents of Mst. Uzma Sakhawat did not accept their marriage so, they had lodged a false case bearing F.I.R.
No.581 of 2010 and in the said writ petition Yasir Ali, petitioner and Mst. Uzma Sakhawat sought quashment of the instant F.I.R., but when she came to pursue her writ petition before this Court; she was abducted forcibly by her parents and thereafter she changed her version under the pressure of her parents; that the medical evidence of the victim also negates the story of prosecution; that Mst. Uzma Sakhawat, the alleged victim took different versions at different times which makes the whole story of prosecution as doubtful; that the petitioner has filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against Mst. Uzma Sakhawat, which is pending adjudication in the competent Court; that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, no offence, whatsoever, has been committed by the petitioner so he was entitled to the grant of pre-arrest bail.
4. Learned DPG and learned counsel for the complainant contended that the petitioner was specifically nominated in the F.I.R.; that there was specific allegation against him that he abducted Mst. Uzma Sakhawat; that Mst. Uzma Sakhawat supported the prosecution story when her statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C. Was recorded by the police wherein she levelled specific allegation of abduction and Zina-bilJabr against the petitioner; that medical evidence also corroborates the prosecution story; that Mst. Uzma Sakhawat has also filed a suit for jactitation of marriage against the petitioner which is pending adjudication in the competent Court; that offence alleged against the petitioner falls within the purview of prohibitory clause of section 497 of Cr.P.C.; that recovery of golden ornaments and cash amounting to Rs.54,000 is yet to be effected from the possession of the petitioner so, the petitioner was not entitled to the extraordinary relief of pre- arrest bail.
5 I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance.
6. This alleged occurrence took place on 27-8-2010 at about 2-00 p.m. Whereas the matter was reported to police on 29-8-2010 at 9-00 p m with an extra ordinary delay of three days, which was not properly explained by the complainant. In the F.I.R. Complainant himself admitted that Mst.
Uzma Sakhawat had developed illicit relations with. Yasir petitioner. Muhammad Yasin and Abdul Ghafoor P. Ws. Informed the complainant that Mst. Uzma Sakhawat was seen proceeding along with accused persons in a car towards City. There was no evidence that Mst. Uzma Sakhawat was either enticed away or forcibly abducted by the petitioner. Mst. Uzma Sakhawat filed a writ petition vide Diary No.74646 of 2010 before Lahore High Court,. Lahore against two SHOs and her father.
Copy of writ petition is available on the file. Perusal of this writ petition reveals that she contended that she being sui juria left the house of her parents on 26-8-2010 and contracted marriage with Yasir Ali, petitioner on 27-8-2010 out of her own free will according to Shriat Muhammadi and against the wishes of her parents and that she was living with her husband Yasir Ali and that she was being harassed and threatened illegally by the SHOs at the instance of her father respondent No.3 for getting divorce from her husband. Mst. Uzma Sakhawat also attached her affidavit in this regard with this Writ Petition. Yasir Ali, petitioner and Mst. Uzma Sakhawat filed another writ petition No.9686 of 2010 before this Court for quashment of instant F.I.R. No.581 of 2010. In this writ petition Mst. Uzma Sakhawat and Yasir Ali contended that they entered into a marriage contract with their own free will and consent and without the consent of parents of Mst. Uzma Sakhawat,. Petitioner No.2.
7. Mst. Uzma Sakhawat got her statement recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C. Before the police on 6-10-2010 and according to said statement she on getting opportunity left Lahore on 24-9-2010 and contacted her parents, who brought her in their house. It is ununderstandable that if Mst. Uzma Sakhawat left Lahore from the clutches of accused persons on 24-9-2010 then why she did not get her statement recorded before the police immediately thereafter rather she kept mum for about 12-days. Prima facie, I have reason to believe that her statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C. Was recorded with such delay as she was being pressurized by her parents to change her version. The statement of Mst. Uzma Sakhawat recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C. C is contrary to the version of the complainant put forth in the F.I.R. Mst. Uzma Sakhawat filed a suit for jactitation of marriage against Yasir Ali, petitioner wherein she changed her stance which was taken by her in her statement under section 161 of Cr.P.C. And contended that on the day of occurrence accused persons forcibly abducted her on gun-point. The contradictory stances taken by Mst. Uzma Sakhawat, the alleged abductee, at different occasions has shaken her credibility. According to her own version Mst. Uzma Sakhawat came to her parents on 24-9-2010 but she was medically examined on 18-10-2010 with an extraordinary delay of 24-days. Perusal of Medico-legal report of Mst. Uzma Sakhawat reveals that Lady Doctor observed two injuries on her person with blunt weapon and the probable duration of these injuries was three to five days which means that these injuries were sustained by her, when she was with her parents. The ocular account of the prosecution story is also in conflict with medical evidence. The record is silent that why she was not got medically examined immediately. During investigation Yasir Ali, petitioner produced his photographs with Mst. Uzma Sakhawat which are also available on the police file, which show that these were taken at the time of their marriage. Perusal of statement of Mst. Uzma Sakhawat under section 161 of Cr.P.C. Also reveals that she was taken by the petitioner at different places including Arif Wala, Multan etc, but, she did not raise any hue and cry any where that she was being forcibly abducted by the petitioner. So far as recovery of golden ornaments and cash from the possession of the petitioner is concerned pre-arrest bail of the petitioner cannot be rejected due to aforementioned recovery as according to F.I.R. Petitioner kept on sitting in the car which was parked in the street at the time of alleged occurrence and there was no allegatio against the petitioner that he ever entered in the house of the complainant, so, it was out of question that he took golden ornaments and cash of the complainant party.
8. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioner comes within the purview of further inquiry, resultantly, petition in hand is accepted and ad interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner is confirmed subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00.000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. 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.