1. ' The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there was a delay of six hours in lodging the F.I.R.; that the prosecution story was highly improbable; and that the final opinion of the doctor has not been obtained as yet.
2. 2.I have been taken through the F.I.R. Of this case. It was alleged by the prosecution that the petitioner committed carnal intercourse against the order of nature with Abid Ali, a boy aged fourteen years, when he had gone to make certain purchases. The petitioner abducted Abid All into his house and committed sodomy on knife point. I have perused the medico-legal report. The prosecution version received support from the medical evidence. The doctor had noticed an injury around the anus. He obtained rectal swabs. A report has been received from the Chemical Examiner to the effect that the rectal swabs were found stained with semen and blood. The Investigating Officer should have obtained the final report from the doctor but in view of the medical evidence and the opinion of the Chemical Examiner the offence of sodomy appears to have been committed. The boy was taken to the police station. There was no inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. There was no motive on the part of the complainant or his son to make such like allegation against the petitioner. The complainant resided in Abu-Zehbi and he had come to Pakistan a month ago whereas his other members of the family including the victim had reached Pakistan three months before the occurrence. The affidavit of Khalid Jamil can have no bearing on the fate of this case as he was not one of the eyewitnesses. Offence under section 12 of Ordinance VII of 1979 is punishable with death or imprisonment for life while offence under section 377, P.P.C. Is punishable with imprisonment for life. It is not a fit case for bail. The petition is dismissed.