ORDER The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR. No. 168 of 2005 registered at P.S. City Saddar District Bhakkar under section 10 of the offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 with the allegation that he committed Zina Bil Jabr with Mst. Bashiran, the victim girl.
2. The pre-arrest bail of the petitioner had already been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 18-8-2005 and he was taken into custody by the police. He applied for his post arrest bail before the learned ASJ Bhakkar who declined the same through order dated 21-10-2005.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no evidence regarding commission of zina with the victim girl and that the petitioner has been involved in this case mala fidley due to political rivalry in the area; that DNA test report of the petitioner is in negative and the swabs were not found by the Chemical Examiner stained with semen; that no useful purposes would be served in detaining the petitioner in Jail indefinitely as there is no likelihood of early conclusion of the trial of case.
4. Conversely, learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner, contending that FIR had been registered on 9.6.2005 and the petitioner is an absconder and he did not join the investigation; that he was arrested on 18-8-2005 when his pre- arrest bail was dismissed by this Court and he managed to get the Chemical Examiner and DNA reports in his. Favour during the period of his abscondence.
5.I have heard both sides and perused record.
6.The victim girl had supported the prosecution story and the PWs mentioned in the FIR have also corroborated the same in their statements under section 161 Cr.P.C. So far ae the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been involved in the case due to political rivalry or party faction is concerned, the answer would be that even in a rotten society no person puts at stake her family honour and there is no evidence on record to establish the defence of the petitioner that there was direct enmity between him and the complainant.
7. The Lady Doctor in her report had opined that hymen of the victim is freshly torn', bleeding presently. Prima-facie, there is sufficient material available on record to connect the petitioner with the commission of offence.
8. As regards, the report of DNA test and the swabs are concerned, it requires deeper appreciation by the Court and it is settled proposition of law by the Apex Court of the country that at bail stage the Court has merely to examine it to see whether prima face the evidence was sufficient to connect the accused with the crime as laid down in cases of Tanvir Ahmad vs. Muhammad Sadiq (PLD 1994 SC 88), Shah Zaman vs. State (PLD 1994 Sc 65) and Faqir Hussain vs. Asad Ali Khan (2003 P.Cr.L.J. 518).
9. In these circumstances, I find that the petitioner is involved in a heinous offence which is covered within the prohibition as contained in Section 497 Cr.P.C, and the other is that the petitioner had been absconded in the past, hence, not entitled for any concession. Consequently, this bail petition having no force is dismissed.