ILLICIT INTERCOURSE

IN THE COURT OF (NAME OF THE JUDGE),

ADDL; SESSIONS JUDGE,

(NAME OF THE CITY).

Name and address of the petitioner

Vs

The State.

                             PRE-ARREST BAIL PETITOIN.

O r d e r.

                   The petitioner/accused namely ______________ seeks confirmation of his pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.Number/Year , U/S 496-A PPC, registered at P.S. ABC, XYZ .

2.                Briefly, the allegation against the petitioner was that of enticing away and of illicit intercourse with the wife of complainant, hence this case.

3.                Learned Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the case against the petitioner is false & frivolous, that complainant and the alleged abductee both have submitted affidavits and recorded their statements in the court that the petitioner is innocent and they have no objection upon confirmation of his bail before arrest, that the petitioner is previous non-convict, behind the bars and no more required to police for further interrogation. Therefore, the pre-arrest bail of the petitioner may be confirmed.

4.                Learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor for the State vehemently contested the instant bail petition, while the complainant has no objection upon confirmation of pre-arrest bail of the petitioner.

                   Arguments heard. Record perused.

5.                Complainant and alleged abductee (name of the abductee) both have appeared before the court and have submitted their respective affidavits Mark-A & Mark-B and also recorded their statements that the petitioner is no more their accused and they also have no objection upon confirmation of pre-arrest bail of the petitioner. In view of the statements and affidavits of the complainant and alleged abductee, the case against the petitioner has become that of further inquiry. Though the offence is not compoundable, but Compromise is always considered as redeeming factor, which brought peace and harmony in the society. The court always respected the compounding of offence whether the same was compoundable or not. In this regard, reliance is placed on judgment titled “Ijaz Ahmad Tarrar Vs State” reported in 2012 MLD 1507 & 2013 P.Cr.L.J 1458. Therefore, in view of the above, ad-interim bail granted to the petitioner, is hereby confirmed, in case FIR No.00/00, U/S  496-A PPC, P.S. ABC, XYZ, subject to furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs.100,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court within seven days. File be consigned to the record room, after its completion.

Announced:

Dated

                                                                                                                                           Addl: Sessions Judge

                                                                                Faisalabad.