' IQBAL HAMEED-UR-REHMAN, J.---The petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,275 dated 14- 12-2005 registered under sections 10/11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance, 1979 at Police Station Kot Mubarik Distt. Dera Ghazi Khan.
2. The brief facts of the prosecution case as narrated by Amir Muhammad complainant are that he is resident of Chah Haji Wala Mauza Bahadur Garh. On the night intervening 9/10-12-2005 he along with his family members slept in his house. In the morning they found that his two sisters, namely, Mst. Asia Bibi aged 14 years and Mst. Haleema Bibi aged 11 years were not present at the house. He along with his brother started search for his said two sisters and was told by the witnesses that they had seen the petitioner and others who had abducted the said two girls. Hence the F.I.R.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the F.I.R. Was lodged with a delay of three days.
It is submitted that in fact Mst. Haleema was 18 years of age and being sui juris had contracted marriage with the petitioner of her own free-will on 8-8-2005 and the Nikah was duly registered.
Likewise Mst. Asia Bibi had contracted marriage with Ali Muhammad of her own free-will and the said Nikah was also solemnized on 8-8-2005; that the Nikah has not been challenged and after four months of the said Nikah the instant F.I.R. Has been lodged, that the petitioner has filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights which is pending in the Court of learned Judge Family Court at Dera Ghazi Khan and that the petitioner is in jail for the last more than one year and the trial of the petitioner has been adjourned sine die, therefore, relying on the dictum laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in Farzana Naheed and others v. The State 2006 SCM R 826 and Mst.
Kausar and another v. The State 2005 M LD 1081 submits that the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail.
4. Conversely, the learned Deputy Prosecutor General opposes the grant of bail on the ground that the earlier bail petition of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court on 17-7-2006 and no fresh ground has accrued to the petitioner and that the alleged abductee has got recorded her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. In which she has levelled allegation that she has been abducted by the petitioner and subjected to rape.
5. I have considered the arguments of both the parties and have also gone through the record.
6. Admittedly, the petitioner has filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights on 21-1-2006 which is pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge/Judge Family Court, Dera Ghazi Khan. During pendency of the said suit, challan in the instant case was submitted in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan. The petitioner made an application for sine die adjournment of the trial till the decision of the suit for restitution of conjugal rights. The said application was accepted vide order dated 2-11-2006 and the trial of the petitioner in the instant case has been adjourned till the decision of the said suit. Therefore, keeping the petitioner in jail for indefinite period would not be conducive to the ends of justice. In this regard I am forfeited by the dictum laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Farzana Naheed and others supra.
7. In this view of the matter the petitioner is allowed bail subject to his furnishing surety bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.