1. ' Karam Dad and his co-accused namely, Anwar Khan on the cancellation of their -bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Abbottabad vide his order, dated 7-7-1986 granted to them by the Illaqa Magistrate on 17-5-1986 on offence under section 6/10/19(2), Hudood Ordinance read with section 451, P.P.C. Of P.S. Mirpur, have made this further application for their release on bail.
2. ' The report of the occurrence was lodged by Mst. Humbi Razia to the police station on 2-5-1986 at 23 hours in which she stated that while she was sleeping in her house and her husband was away to Peshawar her son-in-law Muhammad Anwar opened the door by force whereafter he and Karam Dad subjected her to Zina and thereafter both of them decamped from the spot.
3. Muhammad Anwar cut her hairs with a razor before leaving the house. Muhammad Arshad her son aged about 8/9 years was stated to have witnessed the occurrence.
4. ' The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there was sufficient material before the Illaqa Magistrate in ordering release of the accused on bail. However, the learned Sessions Judge thus cancelling that order did not refer as such and merely observed that the accused are charged for heinous offence in the F.I.R. The learned counsel referred to the report lodged by Mst.
5. Safia wife of Muhammad Anwar accused lodged on the same day i,e, 2-5-1986 at 20-45 hours in which she had before hand informed the police that the complainant had threatened her that she will break open her door of the house and after injuring herself report against her and her husband.
6. Copy of this report is Annexure "I" on the file. There is also an affidavit on the file by Mst. Safia daughter of the complainant in which she has stated on oath that her mother is a woman of bad repute and that she had made an application to the police to take action against her and in retaliation the present report has been lodged against her husband and his relation. The complainant who is present in Court has made an application for adjournment of the case for the reason given therein but the application is rejected as even at the earlier hearing, the learned counsel representing the complainant had made a request for adjournment of the case. This application is nothing more but a delaying tactic for keeping the accused behind the bar who on the face of the record are entitled to the grant of bail. From the copy of the repo available on the file of the case it is evident that her daughter had informed the police two hours before the lodging of the report that sh will implicate her and her husband in a criminal case by injuring herself. In this view of the matter the learned Illaqa Magistrate was perfectl justified in granting bail to the accused petitioners while the learned Sessions Judge has made great illegality and irregularity by ignorin material available on the record in cancelling the order of learned Magistrate. I, therefore, order both the accused to be released on be' subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,5,000 (rupees five thousand only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfactio of Illaqa/Duty Magistrate.