' ZAFAR IQBAL CHAUDHRY, J.---Through this petition Mst. Shabana Kausar petitioner has sought cancellation of bail allowed to respondent No,l by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin vide his order dated 11-12-2007 in case F.I.R. No,506 registered at Police Station Khuthiala Sheikhan on 27-9-2007 under section 365-B, P.P.C.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that as the serious allegations of Zina and abduction have been levelled against the respondent in the F.I.R. And the offence alleged against respondent No,l falls under the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. He was not entitled to the concession of bail and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin has committed legal error while granting him bail. On the other hand learned D.P.G. As well as learned counsel for respondent No,l stated that F.I.R. Was lodged after a delay of about fifty-five days and no explanation was offered by the complainant for the said delay. Not only that during this period mother of the complainant who could have informed the police about the abduction of her daughter kept silent and has not reported to any agency about the occurrence which shows that this was a case of elopement and the petitioner went to her own and with her free consent contracted marriage with the respondent No,
1. In support of his contention the learned counsel for respondent No,l relied upon a Nikah Nama dated 6-8-2007 and also complaint titled Mst. Shabana Kausar v. Ghulam Nabi, etc. Filed by the petitioner before the Senior Civil Judge/Magistrate section 30, Mandi Bahauddin dated 7-8-2007 in which the petitioner specifically alleged that she had contracted marriage of her own free-will and volition with respondent No,l. He had gone on to maintain that after registration of the case the petitioner also filed a suit for dissolution of marriage which is pending before the Judge, Family Court.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has straightaway been noticed by me that admittedly case was lodged by the petitioner after a delay of fifty-five days of the alleged occurrence and during this intervening period mother of the petitioner has not made any effort to get a criminal case registered regarding abduction of her daughter. After perusing the file it has made clear that the petitioner had left the house of respondent No, 1 herself and after that she lodged the impugned F.I.R. Against him. Not only that, she has also filed a suit for dissolution of marriage which is admittedly pending before the Judge.
Family Court at Mandi Bahauddin. Moreover the petitioner also chose to file a private complaint titled Mst. Shabana Kausar v. Ghulam Nabi, etc. In the Court of Senior Civil Judge/Magistrate Section 30, Mandi Bahauddin in which she admitted her marriage with respondent No,l. In response to the existence of Nikah Nama dated 6-8-2007: the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that this is not a registered document and cannot be relied upon at this stage. This argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner has no force because in the light of the suit for dissolution of marriage the fact of Nikah is admitted by the petitioner herself and this fact is yet to be decided by the learned Judge, Family Court that whether Nikah Nama is a registered document or not.
Reliance is placed on the case of Asia Perveen v. Station House Officer, Police Station Chiniot Saddar District Jhang and 2 others (2005 PCr.LJ 681). Keeping in view all the above-mentioned features of this case the learned Additional Sessions Judge has rightly observed that the case against respondent No,l calls for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. It is noteworthy to point out here that the allegation levelled by the petitioner for misusing the concession of bail by respondent No,l was neither supported by the learned counsel for the petitioner during the course of arguments nor any document has been produced before this Court to substantiate this bald allegation. In view of above I do not find any illegality in the order of discretion exercised by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin in favour of respondent No,l and this petition is dismissed.