2005 PLP 2559 (YLR)

The petitioner Muhammad Siddique filed Crl. Miscellaneous No.3425-B of 2004 and Muhammad Yousaf etc. filed Crl. Miscellaneous No.3842-B of 2004 for the grant of post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.220 of 2002 dated 20-10-2002 initially registered under section 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No.VII of 1979 at Police Station, Shah Kot District Sahiwal on the statement of Muhammad Murad alleging abduction of his wife Mst. Sallan, by Muhammad Mansha, Shahamand, Rani Bibi and Riaz alias Kali which having been found false as Muhammad Mansha and Mst. Sallan Bibi claimed to be married with each other, offences under sections 471/420/468, P.P.C. were applied against the petitioners for producing forged Nikahnama and through this single order I propose to dispose of the same together.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that after registration of the case initially regarding abduction, the nominated accused did not appear whereupon the proceedings under sections 87/88, Cr.P.C. were conducted and they for the first time appeared after two years of the registration of the case on 23-2-2004 with a claim that Mst. Sallan had contracted Nikah with Mansha and the story narrated in the F.I.R. regarding her abduction was false. According to the learned counsel merely on the basis of the report of Hand Writing Expert the police came to the conclusion that the Nikahnama produced by the petitioners was forged one, whereas sufficient evidence was produced on the record to prove that Mst. Sallan was married with Muhammad Murad complainant and father of Mst. Sallan was also witness of the said Nikahnama. Reliance is placed on "1994 PCr.LJ 2045", in support of his contentions.

3. Learned State counsel on the other hand opposes this application.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record. Originally Muhammad Murad was the complainant in the above said case and according to him the alleged abductee, namely, Mst. Sallan Bibi was married with' him, who was abducted by Mansha and others. They did not appear for about two - years before the Investigating Officer in the present case and were declared proclaimed offenders. However, subsequently stand was taken by them that they were married with each other and the earlier story narrated by Murad complainant was false. It is a case of two versions and the police had joined the witnesses of both the parties during the investigation and the Nikahnama produced by the said complainant was found to be registered with Nikah Registrar in the year 1998. Merely, on the basis of the report of the Hand Writing Expert the petitioners have been challaned and which one version is correct will be seen by the learned trial Court after recording evidence of the parties. None of the offence with A which the petitioners are allegedly involved does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Hence both Crl. Miscellaneous Nos. 3425-B and 3842-B of 2004 are accepted and the petitioners, namely, Muhammad Siddique, Muhammad Yousaf, Mughla and Muhammad. Murad are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-1101/L Bail granted.