SARDAR MUHAMMAD SHAMIM KHAN, C.J. Through instant Criminal Petition petitioner namely Asad Ullah seeks post arrest bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No.211 of 2022 dated 19.11.2022 offences under sections 494, 365-B, 34 & 109, P.P.C. at police station Jutial District Gilgit.
2. According to FIR, on 19.11,2022 at about 02:15 P.M the wife of the complainant namely Mst. Kalsoom went outside from her house in response to a vehicle horn and after that she did not return back.
The complainant kept on searching for his wife but she was not traced. The complainant entertained suspicion that his wife was deceitfully abducted by Mubashir accused. Hence instant FIR was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is not nominated in the FIR; that the petitioner was implicated in the instant case on the basis of supplementary statement of the complainant recorded by the police on 28.11.2022 with the delay of nine days; that in fact Mst.
Kalsoom Bibi the alleged abductee out of her own free will contracted marriage with Mubasir co- accused and this regard she appeared before the court of learned Magistrate Dassu and got her statement recorded; that the alleged abductee in her said statement has not supported the prosecution version, as narrated by the complainant in the FIR; that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the instant case on the basis of mala fide on account of his relationship with co- accused namely Mubashir ; that the petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and is no more required by the police for the purpose of further investigation. Thus, it is submitted that by accepting instant appeal, the petitioner may be admitted to post arrest bail.
4. Learned Prosecutor-General and learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the instant appeal on the grounds that although the petitioner is not nominated in the FIR yet he was implicated in the instant case on the basis of supplementary statement of the complainant; that there was specific allegation against the petitioner that he alongwith co- accused deceitfully abducted the wife of the complainant; that during investigation the police recorded the statements of P.Ws wherein they fully implicated the petitioner in the commission of instant occurrence and he, was found guilty in the investigation conducted by the police; that the offences alleged against the petitioner are heinous in nature and come within the purview of prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. Thus, it is submitted that instant Crl. Appeal is liable to be dismissed.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. It has been noticed that petitioner is not nominated in the FIR. He was implicated in the instant case on the basis of supplementary statement of the complainant recorded by the police on 28.11.2022, nine days after the occurrence. Although the complainant in his said statement levelled allegation of abduction against the petitioner alongwith co-accused namely Saraj-ud-Din, Ahmed Ullah, Maqbool Alam and Umar Farooq yet record reveals that Mst. Kalsoom Bibi the alleged victim filed private complaint under sections 506 and 34 P.P.C. before the court of learned Magistrate Dassu against, her father and other relatives wherein she herself appeared before the said court and got her statement recorded. In her said statement she categorically contended that she was not abducted by any of the accused, rather, on 20.08.2021, she out of her own free will contracted marriage with Mubashir co-accused. It was further contended by her that her parents were not Happy on this marriage and they were causing illegal harassment to her therefore, she filed the aforesaid private complaint against her father and other relatives. She further contended that before contracting marriage with Mubashir, her Nikah was not solemnized with anyone. Keeping in view the aforesaid statement of Mst. Kalsoom Bibi the alleged abductee the offences under sections 365-B and 494, P.P.C. are not attracted against the petitioner. It has further been noticed that Sirajuddin, Ahmad Ullah, Maqbool Ahmad and Umar Farooq co-accused with similar allegation preferred their post arrest bail which was allowed by learned Sessions Judge Gilgit and learned Chief Court. The case of the petitioner is at par with the case of aforesaid co-accused, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for the same relief keeping in view the rule of consistency.
The petitioner is behind the bars since his arrest and is no more required by the police for the purpose of further investigation. No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in jail for an indefinite period.
7. For what has been discussed above, instant Criminal Appeal is accepted and petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with one surety in the like to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.