SARFRAZ Versus State

ORDER

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.--- Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. Sarfraz and Mohsin Ali petitioners have sought bail after arrest in case FIR No. 406/15, dated 01.10.2015 registered at Police Station Mochiwala, District Jhang in respect of offences under sections 365-B/376(2)/382/411, P.P.C.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record with their able assistance it has been noticed that this is bail after arrest and only tentative assessment is required at this stage. A plain reading of the FIR shows that only allegations of abduction and extension of threats for committing Zina with Mst. Amina Bibi, the alleged victim have been leveled against the petitioners in the FIR. During course of investigation it has come on record that the alleged abductee has contracted marriage with one Safdar Nadeem co-accused/son of Sarfraz petitioner No. 1 of her own Free will and volition which fact is evidenced from a Nikah Nama appended with this petition as Annexure-G. Thereafter the alleged abductee has also instituted a private complaint under sections 452/506, P.P.C. wherein she has also got recorded statement to the effect that as a matter of fact she has contracted marriage with Safdar Nadeem co-accused against the will of her parents and that is why they had tried to commit her murder after entering in her matrimonial house. It may not be out of place to point here that when the alleged anductee Mst. Amina Bibi came to her parents she has opted to file suit for jactitation of marriage in a learned Family Court, Jhang which fact prima facie establish factum of Nikah of alleged abductee Mst. Amina Bibi with Safdar Nadeem co-accused/son of petitioner No. 1. Today learned counsel for the petitioner has also produced copy of suit filed by above said Safdar Nadeem co-accused for restitution of conjugal rights. In the backdrop of above narrated circumstances it seems that a matrimonial issue is being transformed into criminal case by the complainant to satisfy her vengeance, hence the question whether the abductee/victim has actually been abducted by the petitioners or she has herself left the house of her parents and contracted marriage with Safdar Nadeem co -accused/son of petitioner No. 1 shall be determined by the learned Family Judge who has already taken cognizance of the case. Reliance can easily be placed on the case of Muhammad Azam v. Muhammad Iqbal and others (PLD 1984 SC 95). In the FIR the complainant herself has mentioned that the accused persons while abducting the alleged victim Mst. Amina Bibi were saying that when Mst. Bushra daughter of Ahmad co-accused would be returned then they will also return the alleged abductee/victim. In view of above narrated circumstances a possibility cannot be ruled out of consideration that the petitioners have been involved by the complainant in this case under the heat of prevailing animosity between the parties. Admittedly Sarfraz petitioner No. 1 is real father of main accused Safdar Nadeem, therefore, possibility of spreading the net wide to entangle maximum person from petitioners' side cannot be ruled out of consideration at this stage. The petitioners are previous non-convict, never involved in any criminal case, investigation of this case is complete, thus, no useful purpose would be served by keeping them behind the bars. I may observe here that grant of bail does not mean that accused is acquitted of the charge rather it is only a change of custody from State to surety.

3. For what has been discussed above, the case against the petitiomers calls for further inquiry into their guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 100,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

4. Before parting with this order it is, however, clarified that the observations made hereinabove are just tentative in nature and the same shall not prejudice the learned trial court during trial.

JK/S-70/L Petition allowe