1994 P Cr (PLP)

The petitioners seek post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.67/94, dated 4-4-1994 registered under sections 468 and 471, P.P.C. and Article 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No.VII of 1979 with Police Station Millat Park, Lahore. The petitioners Nos.l and 2 are the accused persons in the instant case.

2. The said F.I.R. was registered at the instance of Muhammad Akram, father of the abductee and as he has narrated in the F:I.R. that on 4-4-1994 when he was away from his house in connection with his work, he was informed that Muhammad Ali and his mother alongwith Ishfaq and Shaukat Iqbal came to his house and they forcibly entered into the house of the complainant and threatened the inhabitants of the house. Mst. Naila daughter of the complainant was abducted forcibly by the aforesaid persons with intent to commit Zina-bil-Jabr.

3. The local police conducted the investigation and prepared the report under section 173, Cr.P.C. placing the names of Muhammad Ali and Muhammad Sultan Sheikh in Column No.3 where the, names of Abdul Rehman, Muhammad Nadim, Nasir Ahmed, Muhammad Rafi and Maulvi Muhammad Arif in Column No.2. The complete challan is now ready for submission in the trial Court.

4. The petitioners had moved bail application on 27-7-1994 and the same was fixed for hearing before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore. It was fixed for hearing on 2-9-1994 and notice was issued. It was adjourned and fixed for 4-8-1994 and on the said date requisitioned record was also present. It was again adjourned to 7-8-1994 and the same is now fixed for 22-8-1994.

5. The petitioners have now moved bail petition in this Court and the same was placed before my learned brother Rashid Aziz Khan, J. The cognizance of the said application was taken by his Lordship and the notice was issued.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that the main accused Muhammad Ali, was arrested on 8-4-1994, who had abducted Mst. Naila daughter of the complainant, has been released on bail on 30-6-1994 whereas the other co-accused Muhammad Sultan Sheikh, who was, placed in Column No.2 prepared under section 173, Cr.P.C. was also enlarged on bail before arrest and the same was confirmed on 8-5-1994. The petitioner No.l, Abdul Rehman was arrested on 25-7-1994 and was sent to judicial lock-up on 26-7-1994 whereas the other petitioner, Muhammad Rafi, who was arrested on 26-7-1994 and was sent to judicial lock-up on 27-7-1994. Sine then they are in judicial lock-up. The learned counsel for the petitioners further contended that the petitioners are the witness of Nikahnama which was performed by Maulvi Muhammad Arif, who is also the signatory of the said Nikahnama. It is maintained that the petitioners have neither participated in the commission of offence nor it is the case of the prosecution. The petitioners are no more required by the police for investigation. No justiciable purpose shall be served while keeping the petitioners in judicial lock-up any further.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the bail petition vehemently and prayed for the dismissal of the same.

8. I have given my anxious consideration to the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the file, and the provisions of law. The post-arrest bail petition was moved by the petitioners to a Court of plenary jurisdiction and the learned Additional Sessions Judge did not decide the petition and adjournments were ordered on one or the other pretext. The delay in deciding the bail petition is amounting to denial of bail. In the circumstances of the instant case, the learned Additional Sessions Judge should have decided the petition especially keeping in view the case of the main accused Muhammad Ali, who had abducted the girl and was enlarged on bail and bail before arrest was also confirmed of the co-accused, who is placed in Column No.2 of the challan.

9. It is quite obvious from the Nikahnama that the petitioners and the alleged abductee had entered into Nikah and this fact has also been confirmed by the prosecution. The petitioners have not been attributed any role in the commission of the offence. They are only signatories of the A Nikahnama. It is also made clear from the record - that the petitioners are neither previous convicts nor hardened criminals arid are also not required by the police.

10. Keeping in view what has been stated above, the petitioners are hereby allowed bail subject to furnishing their bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. (City)/Duty Magistrate, Lahore. N.H.Q./A-699/L Bail allowed.