1. Through this petition under section 498 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.51/2016, dated 22.02.2016 registered under section 365-B PPC at Police Station Lundianwala District Faisalabad.
2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record of this case has also been perused with their able assistance. This is bail before arrest and only tentative assessment is allowed at this stage. It has been noticed by this Court that there is a delay of two months and fourteen days in the registration of FIR which has not been explained by the complainant which prima facie shows that the FIR has been got recorded after due deliberations and consultations. As per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner alongwith his co-accused abducted Mst. Kalsoom Rani on 08.12.2015 and also committed theft of valuable articles and cash of Rs.15000/- from the house of the complainant. It has also been noticed by this Court that the alleged abductee Mst. Kaslsoom Rani has contracted Nikah with the petitioner on 24.11.2015 before the registration of the instant case and in this regard copy of the Nikah Nama is attached with this petition and the said abductee also filed private complaint before learned Judicial Magistrate, Lahore on 10.12.2015 and also recorded her statement that she has not been abducted by anybody rather she contracted marriage with petitioner with her free will and consent.
Mst. Kalsoom Rani the alleged abductee also recorded her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate Section 30, District Court, Lahore wherein she stated that she being sui-juris has contracted marriage with petitioner Abdul Razzaq on 24.11.2015 with her free consent and now she is living happily and performing matrimonial obligations under the four corners of Islam. Today the alleged abductee Mst. Kalsoom Rani appeared before this court and got recorded her statement before the Investigation Officer that she has contracted marriage with the petitioner Abdul Razzaq with her free consent and nobody has abducted her. Admittedly the petitioner is previous non-convicts. He has already joined the investigation. Only because imprisonment of offence with which the petitioner is charged falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. is no ground to refuse bail if otherwise he became entitled to grant of pre-arrest bail.
3. For what has been discussed above, false implication of the present petitioner by the complainant with malafide intention due to the grudge that his daughter contracted love marriage with petitioner cannot be ruled out of consideration. The ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner vide this Court’s order dated 29.04.2016 is hereby confirmed subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Trial Court/Area Magistrate.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.
Further information regarding pre-arrest bail matters can be solicited from AUJ LAWYERS. Feel free to contact us in case you need any clarification and/or require legal assistance regarding similar matters.