SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, J.---Though this petition filed under section 497, Cr.P.C., the petitioners namely Zubair and Perveez are seeking post-arrest bail in the case FIR No.398 of 2019, dated 12.05.2019 registered at Police Station Gaggoo, District V ehari, in respect of an of fence under section 365-B, P .P.C.
2. The allegation as against the petitioners, namely Zubair and Pervez, culled from the evidentiary material produced before the Court, is that they abducted Mst. Nagina Bibi and Tayyaba Kausar , daughters of the complainant.
3. The arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Deputy Prosecutor General have been heard and record of this case has been perused with their able assistance.
4. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreciation is not allowed at this stage. It has been noticed by this Court that despite the fact that as per allegation in the FIR, the daughters of the complaina nt namely Mst. Nagina Bibi and Tayyaba Kausar were abducted on 24.04.2019 but the matter was reported to the police on 12.05.2019. This delay and failure to report the matter of abduc tion of the daughters of the complainant namely Mst. Nagina Bibi and Tayyaba Kausar by their relatives is indicative of the lack of reliability which can be placed upon the evidentiary material produced before the court in support of prosecution case. In the FIR, the complainant has levelled allegation of abducting, but according to Nikah Namas dated 02.05.2019, appended with this petition, a valid Nikah exists between the alleged victim namely , Tayyaba Kausar and the petitioner name ly Zubair and a valid Nikah also exists between the alleged victim namely , Nagina Bibi and the petitioner namely Pcrvcz. The sworn affidavits of both Mst. Nagina Bibi and Tayyaba Kausar are also available on record supporting the factum of their Nikahs.
Additionally , both Mst. Nagina Bibi and Tayyaba Kausar were never produced before any Medical Officer for medical examination so as to support of the allegations levelled against the petitioners. This failure on part of the prosecution is also indicative of the fact that the allegations against the petitioners require further inquiry and 'probe. The learned Deputy Prosecutor General has laid emphasis on the statements of Mst. Nagina Bibi and Tayyaba Kausar recorded under section 161 of Cr.P.C., wherein they have leveled allegation of abduction against the petitioners. In this regard, I would like to observe about this disgusting trend in our society that firstly the girl elopes with her paramour , solemnizes marriage with him and later on when she joins her parents/relatives, she takes somersault and implicates her husb and and in-laws on the asking of her parents. Even otherwise, it is settled law that such type of dispute has to be decided by Family Courts which is the best forum. Reliance can easily be placed upon the case of "Muhammad Azam v. Muhammad Iqbal and others " reported as (PLD 1984 SC 95), wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has been pleased to held as under:- "That the decision of a superior Court including the Supreme Court on the plea of Nikah will have eject on the same issue before a Family Court; That at the trial level the decision in this behalf of the Family Court will have binding effect on the decision in criminal trial; That unless there is pressing unavoidable need to proceed with the criminal trial (as is in the present case to record essential evidence only regarding which there might be danger of it being lost) the Criminal Court should stay the proceedings and await the result of the contest on issue of Nikah before the Family Court, if the suit is already pending or is filed during the criminal trial proceedings. That otherwise too it can ask the party/person concerned to seek a decision on that issue from the Family Court and on refusal or failure in this behalf to raise the necessary presumptions. That in the last-mentioned eventuality the criminal trial would proceed with no change except firstly , as aforementioned about certain presumptions, and secondly , that the issue conce rned shall be decided as nearly as possible in accordance with the spirit underlying the procedure prescribed by the Family Courts Act and the rules thereunder , in so far as they do not come in conflict with the procedure for the criminal trial-the provisions regarding compulsory two efforts at compromise would then not apply; That in case the proceedings of the crimin al trial are stayed the accused; might be released on bail so as to enable him them to pursue the Family Court case and refuse/cancel the same in exceptional appropriate, cases; That in case it is just and proper and the Sessions Judge or Additional Sessions Judge is empowered to try both the matters under both system of laws, the trial by the same Court would not be illegal provided the case under the Family Law is decided in the first instance.
That when any case on the criminal side has reached the appeal stage but the issue is still pending before the Family Court, the hearing of the appeal should be stayed for a reasonable time to await the decision by that forum and in case of intentional or otherwise inordinate delay , to take appropriate measures in re-consideration of any concession including bail and the stay , whether it is not being misused; That when the same question is pending before the Federal Shariat Court and the High Court the latter would await the decision by the former Court."
The above facts create reasonable doubt in the prosecution story and it is settled law that the benefit of doubt can be extended in favour of the accused even at bail stage. Admittedly the petitioners are previous non-convicts. They are behind the bars since their arrest on 21.05.2019. Mere involvement in a heinous offence is no ground for refusing bail to an accused who otherwise becomes entitled for the concession of bail. The investigation qua them is complete and their person is no more required for further investigation, therefore, their continued incarceration would not serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
5. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioners becomes one of further inquiry covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Liability of petitioners for the said offences would be determined by the learned trial court after sifting the evidentiary worth of the material produced before the same. Till then, case of the petitioners would be within the domain of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. calling for further inquiry into the petitioners' guilt.
The petition in hand is accepted and the petitioners are admitted to post-arrest bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500.,000/- (rupees five II hundred thousand only) each with two sureties each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of learned trial court.
6. Needless to mention that any observations made in the above order are tentative in nature and shall not influence the trial court. However , a direction is issued to the learned trial Court to conclude the trial of the case expeditiously , preferably within a period of four months from the receipt of this order . If any delay in the conclusion of the trial is caused by the petitioners or any person acting on their behalf, then the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioners in accordance with law .