MEER MUHAMMAD alias AMIR BAKHSH and another vs THE STATE
The petitioners sought post-arrest bail in connection with F.I.R. No. 145 of 1999 registered at Police Station Danewal, District Vehari, under the provisions of the Hudood Ordinance for allegedly abducting the complainant's daughter for illicit intercourse. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail when the F.I.R. was delayed by three months, the abductee was not recovered from their possession, and the police inquiry found them innocent. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition and granted post-arrest bail, holding that keeping the accused in confinement served no useful purpose when no recovery was effected from them and their alleged role could only be determined after a regular trial, especially after a police officer found them innocent. The key principle laid down is that where an accused is implicated in an abduction case without any recovery of the abductee from their possession and is found innocent during police investigation, further detention in jail till trial is unwarranted.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when the F.I.R. is delayed without explanation and no recovery is made from the accused?
- Does a police finding of innocence during investigation entitle an accused to the concession of bail?
- Whether an accused can be kept in continued confinement pending trial when their alleged role in abduction requires determination through regular evidence in the absence of recovery?
ORDER
' The petitioner was arrested on 12-8-1999 in connection with F.I.R. No,145 of 1999, dated 3-5-1999 Police Station, Danewal, District Vehari under the provisions of Hudood Ordinance.
2. The complainant father of the alleged abductee Mst. Salma Bibi stated that on 10-2-1999, the present petitioners along with their brother Khameesa had abducted his daughter for illicit intercourse. Both the petitioners failed before the Additional District Judge who refused to admit them to concession of bail on 10-11-1999.
3. Parties have been heard.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that both of them have been arrested by the police only for the reason that their brother Khameesa had lawfully married the alleged abductee and daughter of the complainant. It is stated that there is no allegation of Zina against the petitioners nor abductee was recovered from their possession. Also states that the aforesaid complaint was lodged after a period of three months and that D.S.P. Circle In-charge had found both the petitioners to be innocent. In support of his submissions that petitioners are entitled to bail in the circumstances, the learned counsel relies upon 1986 PCr.LJ 758 Re: Muhammad Mansha v. The State and 1983 PCr.LJ 2181 Re: Ghulam Hussain v. The State.
5. The learned counsel for the State does not deny the last-stated assertion. However, opposes the concession of bail to the petitioner.
6. After considering the submissions made at the bar, I will allow the petition. The delay in lodging F.I.R., has not been explained nor the alleged abductee was recovered from the petitioners. Circle In-charge has already found both the petitioners to be innocent. In the aforesaid judgments relied upon, it was held that where the abductee was not recovered from the petitioner no useful purpose would be served by detaining an accused in jail till the conclusion of the trial.
7. Whether the abductee is a lawful wife of the brother of the petitioners is to be seen and determined by a competent forum. The petitioners cannot be kept in confinement till the determination of the relationship between the abductee and their brother. Their alleged role in abduction in absence of recovery of the abductee from their possession could only be determined after a regular trial. The Circle In-charge also having found them to be innocent, I find no reason to refuse them the concession of bail.
8. It accordingly allowed. Both the petitioners shall be released on bail subject to their furnishing of bail bond in the sum of Rs,20,000 with one surety each to, the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate/Ilaqa Magistrate.