Pakistan Case Law
2011 P Cr. L J 765

SAFDAR ALI vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2011 P Cr. L J 765
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Criminal Bail Application No, 560 of 2010
Date2010-11-01
Judge(s)Abdul Hadi Khoso
ResultBail refused.
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a bail before arrest application filed by the applicant, Safdar Ali, in relation to an FIR alleging the forcible abduction of Mst. Kanwal by ten armed individuals. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to pre-arrest bail despite the serious nature of the allegations and the non-recovery of the victim. The applicant argued that there was a ten-day delay in lodging the FIR, a twenty-six-day delay in recording witness statements, and existing enmity between the parties, specifically citing a prior murder case filed against the complainant. The Court observed that the applicant was allegedly present at the scene armed with a pistol and that the abducted lady remained unrecovered. The Court held that the case was not a fit one for the grant of pre-arrest bail, emphasizing that the recovery of the victim was a significant factor. Consequently, the Court dismissed the bail application and recalled the interim pre-arrest bail order, noting that the trial court could consider a post-arrest bail application at a later stage.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is a delay in lodging an FIR a sufficient ground for the grant of pre-arrest bail in an abduction case?
  • Does the non-recovery of an abducted person preclude the grant of pre-arrest bail?
  • Can a trial court consider a bail application after the dismissal of a pre-arrest bail petition?
pre-arrest bailabductionFIR delayenmitynon-recovery of victim

ORDER

1. ' ABDUL HADI KHOSO, J.---This case has been registered for an incident of forcible abduction of lady Mst. Kanwal, niece of the complainant Habib-ur-Rehman, in which there are allegations of participating and Committing the offence against 10 persons being duly armed with the weapons.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and State Counsel.

3. ' Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is delay of 10 days in lodging the F.I.R and 26 days' delay in recording the statements of P.Ws. and there is enmity. There is a murder case filed by the applicant's party against the present complainant. On query about the whereabouts of the abducted girl Mst. Kanwal, there is no such information on the record from the complainant party or from the accused party.

4. Presence of the applicant is shown on the place of incident having pistol in his hand. The enmity is also double edged sword. The abducted lady has not been yet recovered.

5. ' In the circumstances, I think that this case is not fit for granting bail before arrest. However, the trial Court can consider the bail application after arrest of the accused.

6. ' With this observation, bait application is dismissed. Interim pre.-arrest bail order is recalled. 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.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.