Allah Jurio & Others vs The State
This matter concerns a bail application filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 by the applicants, who were accused of trespassing into the complainant's house, abducting two women, and causing injuries to a prosecution witness. The applicants sought post-arrest bail after being refused by the Sessions Court, arguing their innocence, the existence of a prior matrimonial dispute, the delayed registration of the FIR, and the minor nature of the injuries sustained. The core legal question was whether the applicants were entitled to bail on the grounds of further inquiry and mala fides. The High Court held that the five-hour delay in lodging the FIR, the fact that the alleged abductees returned to their parents on the same day, the minor nature of the injuries, and the existing matrimonial dispute between the parties collectively established a case for further inquiry. Consequently, the Court granted post-arrest bail to the applicants, subject to the furnishing of surety bonds, emphasizing that unexplained delays and surrounding circumstances warrant relief pending trial.
- Does an unexplained delay in the registration of an FIR constitute grounds for further inquiry in a bail application?
- Can the existence of a prior matrimonial dispute between parties be considered a factor in granting post-arrest bail?
- Is the return of alleged abductees to their parents on the same day of the incident a relevant factor for the court to consider when deciding on bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Irshad Ali Shah J. It is alleged that the applicants with others by making trespass into house of complainant Ali Bux abducted Mst. Amnat and Suneela by causing hatchet blows to PW Ghulam Ali, for that the present case was registered.
2. The applicants on having been refused post arrest bail by learned Sessions Judge, Umerkot have sought for the same from this Court by way of instant application u/s 497 Cr .P.C.
3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants being innocent have been involved in this case falsely by the complainant party in order to satisfy its matrimonial dispute with them; the FIR has been lodged with delay of about five hours; no case for abduction has taken place; the alleged abductees are residing with their parents happily and injuries sustained by PW Ghulam Ali are minor in nature. By contending so, he sought for post -arrest bail for the applicants on point of further enquiry and malafide. In support of his contention he has relied upon cases of Adrees Ahmed and others vs Zafar Ali and another (2010 SCMR 64) and Khalil Ahmed Soomro and others vs The State (PLD 2017 Supreme Court 730)
4. Learned A.P.G. for the State and learne d counsel for the complainant have opposed to grant of post arrest bail to the applicants by contending that they have actively participated in commission of incident.
5. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. The FIR of the incident has been lodged with delay of about five hours, such delay having not been explained plausibly could not be overlooked. The alleged abductees have returned to their parents on the very same date which appears to be significant. The injuries sustained by PW Ghulam Ali are minor in nature. The parties are already disputed over matrimonial affairs. In these circumstances, a case for release of the applicants on bail on point of further inquiry obviously is made out.
7. In view of above, the applicants are admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in sum of Rs.30,000/-each and PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
8. The instant application is disposed of accordingly .