QAISER RASHID KHAN, J. The petitioners seek bail in case FIR No. 426 dated 28.6.2016 registered under section 363 PPC, Police Station Zaida District Swabi after the said relief was declined to him by the learned court below.
2. As per the allegations contained in the FIR ibid, the accused-petitioners alongwith their co-accused Rehman Ali had abducted the minor niece of the complainant aged 3/4 years.
3. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioners produced two affidavits/compromise deeds of the complainant, Haji Bahadar, and Fazal Ullah, father of he minor, whereby they have privately patched up the matter with the accused/petitioners. He mainly relied on the compromise between the complainant and the accused party and also contended that once the complainant party has satisfied themselves about the non-involvement of the accused/petitioners in the commission of the offence then the matter indeed calls for further inquiry into the matter and thus entitling the accused/petitioners to bail.
4. The learned AAG opposed the bail petition tooth and nail and contended that the offence with which the accused/petitioners are charged is non-compoundable and moreover, the same is heinous in nature, hence they are not entitled to bail.
Arguments heard and available record perused.
5. As the record reveals, it was during mobile gasht that the local police received information regarding kidnapping of a minor girl when they rushed to the spot where complainant, Haji Bahadar, reported about the incident whereby while present at his house, he was informed by the neighbourhood children regarding the forcible kidnapping of his niece , namely, Husna, aged about /4 years from the nearby street by three unknown persons and it was the prompt action of the police that the minor was recovered from the possession of the accused/petitioners and their co-accused.
6. Though the complainant party appears to have entered into a compromise with the accused party with the intervention of elders of the area, but in the case in hand, the minor girl was retrieved from the very clutches of the accused/petitioners and their co-accused by none other but the local police and thus their plea of innocence or non-involvement in the kidnapping of the minor would be seen during the trial but cannot be considered at this stage.3 Undoubtedly, the offence is of grave and serious nature and but for the timely and swift action of the police, the accused/petitioners would have succeeded in shifting the minor girl to some unknown destination and as per record, for onward sale to some one.
7. Such tendency of kidnapping the children has been on the rise for the last few months and its spill over to the various parts of the country has reached an alarming proportion whereby faceless people kidnap minor children either for making money through their sale to individuals or gangs of their ilk or for their other nefarious and devilish desires and designs whereby not only the kidnapped children are ruined but their parents are also left in a state of grief and bereavement for the rest of their lives. This is just by way of a passing reference to the state of affairs as it prevails these days.
8. In view of the above stated position and taking a tentative assessment of the available record, the accused/petitioners are prima facie linked with the commission of the offence which is not only serious and heinous in nature but also non-compoundable and, as such, they do not deserve the concession of bail at this stage. Resultantly, this bail petition stands dismissed.
9. Before parting with this order, it is directed that any observations in this order, being purely tentative in nature, should in no way prejudice the proceedings before the learned trial Court where the case be decided on its own merits after recording evidence.