Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.365-A---Abduction for ransom---Bail, refusal of---Record had revealed that alleged abductee was abducted for ransom and initially accused demanded Rs. one crore as ransom and lastly his claim was reduced to Rs.25,00,000-Nothing on the record would suggest that the complainant or the prosecution witnesses had any malice to falsely implicate accused for the commission of the offence---Specific role of demanding ransom in absence of any mala fide on the part of the complainant or the witnesses, prima facie suggested the involvement of accused in the case---Without going deep into the merits of the case, involvement of accused was very much there---Offence for which accused had been charged, fell under the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.---Accused was not entitled to the concession of bail---As investigation in the case was completed and challan had also been submitted before the Trial Court, Trial Court was directed to complete the trial of the case within three months. Khan Askar Afridi for Petitioner. Zahid Yousaf, A.A.-G. for the State. Assadullah Chamkani for the Complainant/Respondent No.2. Date of hearing: 16th November, 2009. JUDGMENT MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.---The accused petitioner charged in case F.I.R. No.369 dated 14-7-2009 registered under section 365-A, P.P.C. in Police Station Daudzai seeks his release on bail on the grounds that he was not directly charged in the F.I.R; there is no ocular evidence against the accused petitioner; the only statement of one Sajid Khan recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. after a considerable delay of about 46 days would not be sufficient to connect him in the commission of offence charged with while on the other hand, Mr. Zahid Yousaf, Additional Advocate-General assisted by Mr. Assadullah Chamkani, counsel for complainant/respondent No.2, vehemently argued that it is a case of abduction and the abductee has not yet been rescued from the clutches of the…