ORDER The petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case FIR No. 171 dated 21.8.2003 registered under sections 10 and 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 at Police Station Kirana District Sargodha.
2. Briefly the allegation against the petitioner alongwith his co-accused is that they abducted Mst.
Naseem, Bibi when she was going on a cycle with her father-in-law.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was declared innocent in the first investigation and that the allegation of commission of Zina has not been leveled against him calling this case for further inquiry.
11. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the petitioner has been directly involved in the commission of the offence of zina in tee statement of victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C, and the first Investigating Officer was influenced, and under political pressure exonerated the petitioner from the offence which eventually ended in his discharge by the learned Magistrate. Later-on, on her petition bearing W.P. No. 17559 of 2003, DIG Range Sargodha was directed to hear the petitioner and pass an appropriate order for transfer of investigation in view of provision of Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002. The investigation was changed and the subsequent I.O. Found sufficient evidence against the petitioner.
12. Heard. Record pursed,
13. The petitioner has been implicated by the victim in her statement u/s. 164 Cr.P.C, in the commission of offence of Zina. The finding of the I.O. Declaring the petitioner innocent has no bearing as this Court in W.P. No. 17559/2003 has directed the DIG to hear the abductee/victim and pass an order for transfer of investigation. The matter was referred to the Standing Board under Article 18(6) of the Police Order, 2002 and the subsequent I.O. After securing permission from the learned Magistrate arrested the petitioner and found him guilty. The challan has been submitted.
This order of the subsequent investigation was also challenged through W.P. No.' 13899/2004 by the petitioner which was dismissed. The petitioner has prima facie committed an offence which falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C.
6. For what has been discussed above, no ground for bail is made out. This petition is dismissed.