--Attempt to abduction--Pre-arrest bail--Confirmation of--FIR has been registered with unexplained delay of about 06-days--As ccurrence was of odd hours of night so at this stage it cannot be expected that action attributed to petitioner was completed or attempted--

 PLJ 2024 Cr.C. (Note) 28
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Muhammad Amjad Rafiq, J.
NADEEM ABBAS and another--Petitioners
versus
STATE, etc.--Respondents
Crl. Misc. Nos. 5002-B, 6222-B of 2022, decided on 27.9.2022.

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--

----S. 498--Pakistan Pencal Code, 1860, S. 365-B/511--Attempt to abduction--Pre-arrest bail--Confirmation of--FIR has been registered with unexplained delay of about 06-days--As ccurrence was of odd hours of night so at this stage it cannot be expected that action attributed to petitioner was completed or attempted--Second petitioner is not nominated in FIR and has no role--Scanty evidence is available against both petitioners at this stage--While deciding pre-arrest bail application merits of case can be touched upon and benefit of doubt, if established, can be extended--Interim pre-arrest bail already granted to petitioners are confirmed.

                                                               [Para 4, 5 & 6] A, B, C, D & E

PLD 2021 SC 708; 2021 SCMR 130; 2022 SCMR 1424;
2022 SCMR 1271 ref

Khawaja Qaisar Butt, Advocate with Petitioner (Nadeem Abbas).

Syed Faheem Hassan Shah, Advocate with Petitioner (Muhammad Azhar Shah).

Miss Asmat Parveen, Deputy District Public Prosecutor for State.

Ch. Zeeshan Saleem Kharal, Advocate for Complainant.

Date of hearing: 27.9.2022.

Order

Through this consolidated order, I propose to decide Crl. Misc. No. 5002-B/2022 as well as Crl. Misc. No. 6222-B/2022.

Petitioners Nadeem Abbas and Muhammad Azhar Shah seek pre-arrest bail in case FIR No. 274 dated 01.06.2022 registered under Sections 365-B/511, PPC at Police Station Karam Pur, District Vehari.

2. Allegation against the petitioner is that they attempted to abduct Mst. Rimsha Bibi, daughter of the complainant on gun point. Hence, this FIR.

3. Heard. Record perused.

4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it was noticed that (FIR has been registered with unexplained delay of about 06 days. No plausible explanation was offered by the complainant for said delay. Petitioner, namely, Nadeem Abbas though was nominated in the FIR and the allegation of attempt to abduct Mst. Rimsha Bibi, daughter of the complainant is so far alleged against him stays with the statement of the victim as well as witnesses. As the occurrence was of odd hours of night so at this stage it cannot be expected that action attributed to the petitioner was completed or attempted which could only be determined by the learned trial Court after recording of evidence.

5. So far as petitioner, namely, Muhammad Azhar Shah is concerned, he is not nominated in the FIR and has no role, whatsoever. Learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed and resisted the petition on the ground that Muhammad Azhar Shah, petitioner maintains criminal history of one case of same nature. However, scanty evidence is available against both the petitioners at this stage. At present, possibility of false implication of the petitioners in this case cannot be ruled out. Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case law reported as “Shahzada Qaiser Arfat alias Qaiser vs. The State and another” (PLD 2021 Supreme Court 708) has held that malafide being a state of mind cannot always be proved through direct evidence, and it was often to be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case. It has been further held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases reported as “Khair Muhammad and another vs. The State through P.G. Punjab and another” (2021 SCMR 130), “Javed Iqbal versus The STATE through Prosecutor General of Punjab and another” (2022 SCMR 1424) and “Muhammad Ijaz versus The State and others” (2022 SCMR 1271) that while deciding pre-arrest bail application merits of the case can be touched upon and benefit of doubt, if established, can be extended. In the circumstances, apparently the petitioners have made out the case for pre-arrest bail.

6. In the light of above circumstances, above mentioned both the petitions are allowed and interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners, namely, Nadeem Abbas and Muhammad Azhar Shah are confirmed subject to furnishing fresh bail bond in the sum of
Rs. 1,00,000/- (one lac) each with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

(K.Q.B.)          Petitions allowed