Ghulam Shabbir and Zameer Hussain petitioners/accused in case FIR No, 52/2013, dated 18.2.2013, under Section 365-B, PPC, Police Station Abdul Hakim District Khanewal have sought pre-arrest bail through this petition.
2. As per FIR lodged on 18.2.2013 by Mst.Manzooran Mai complainant it is alleged that her daughter namely Mst.Sadia was married to Shabbir Dadoana; that on 06.2.2013 at about 2.00 p.m. petitioners came to her house, took a meal and went back at Maghrib time; that the same night at about 8.00 p.m. petitioners armed with pistols .30 bores again came there on a car and forcibly took away complainant's daughter Mst.Sadia when she was available outside the house to attend the call of nature; that occurrence was witnessed by Mumtaz Hussain and Sajid Ali etc; that on 10.2.2013 complainant's daughter made her escape good from the clutches of the accused, reached home and reported that she was detained by the accused at different places however could not commit zina due to availability of other females; that abductee was also deprived of gold ornaments weighing 1 1/2 tolas by the accused.
3. It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that they are innocent and have been falsely implicated by the complainant in this case with mala fide intention with the connivance of police; that FIR is lodged after inordinate delay of about 12 days of the alleged occurrence; that in fact petitioners' brother Ghulam Yasin was killed by the polite officials; that after strenuous efforts made by the petitioners' father for registration of case police hardly registered FIR No, 448/2011 in the offence under Section 319, PPC; that being dis-satisfied petitioners' father lodged an application under Sections 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C. before learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace Mianchannu for a direction to the police to add the offence under Section 302, PPC which was disposed of vide order dated 14.11.2011 with the direction to the DPO Khanewal and SHO Police Station Talumba to proceed in accordance with law but of no avail, therefore, petitioners' father lodged private complaint under Section 302/34, PPC against the police officials; that in the said private complaint police officials were summoned to face the trial under Section 302/34, PPC vide order dated 6.2.2013; that out of the said grudge police has falsely implicated the petitioners by planting Mst. Manzooran Bibi as omplainant of this FIR with concocted story pertaining to the same date i,e, 06.2.2013; that complainant Mst. Manzooran Bibi also lodged an application under Sections 22-A & 22-B Cr.P.C. against the petitioners, their sister Tasleem Bibi and an unknown female with three unknown persons before the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace Kabirwala; that learned Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace entertaining the said application adjourned it for 20.2.2013 for comments of SHO; that before submitting of the comments this FIR was falsely registered by the police against the petitioners with mala fide intention; that no recovery is pending against the petitioners.
4. It is resisted by learned DPG for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant with the contentions that the petitioners are particularly nominated in the FIR with specific role of abduction of complainant's daughter namely Mst. Sadia for the purpose of zina; that the plea of false implication is not substantiated through any speck of material; that the alleged abdcutee corroborates the prosecution version in her statement before the police; that statements of the witnesses recorded by the police corroborate the prosecution version; that Mst. Sadia Bibi victim also lodged an application to the Ex-Officio Justice of the Peace Kabirwala for addition of offence under Section 376, PPC which was disposed of vide order dated 16.3.2011 with a direction to the SHO to do the needful.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. Perusal of record reveals that occurrence allegedly took place on 6.2.2013 and alleged abductee herself reached home on 10.2.2013 whereas FIR was lodged on 18.2.2013 after delay of 12 days of the alleged occurrence without assigning any sufficient reasons. It is astonishing that petitioners detained the abductee for four days but did not commit any zina despite having chances. The alleged abductee herself reached to her parents. She was not recovered from the petitioners.
Petitioners' false implication in the background of animosity with the police officials evident on the record cannot be ruled out. Needless to say that object of pre-arrest bail is to protect the innocent persons from harassm ent and incarceration on the basis of false implication. In the given circumstances petitioner is entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail.
7. For the above reasons, this petition is accepted and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners is confirmed subject to their furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lac) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.