On the night between 13/14th of March, 1986, a raid was conducted at Faletti---s Hotel, Lahore by a party comprising of Nasrullah Khan, M.I.C., Lahore, Marawwat Ali Shah, A.S.P., Station House Officer of Police Stations Qila Gujjar Singh, Civil Lines and Race Course, an A.S.I. And four constables. Mst.
Surrayia, petitioner in this petition, and Ayyaz Hafiz, petitioner in Criminal Misc. 876/13-86 were arrested. Both of them were found in semi-naked position in Room No. 44 of the hotel. On enquiry by the police, Surrayia admitted to have come to the hotel through Anwar Baig, Hotel Booking Clerk for having 'good time'. The police also found a bottle of liquor from the room.
2. On the complaint of Azmat Ullah S.H.O., case under Articles 10, 13, 14 and 18 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, and Articles. 3/4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd)
Order, 1979, was registered against the petitioners at Police Station, Qila Gujjar Singh.
3. The petitioners filed two separate applications for bail. These were dismissed by an Additional Sessions Judge Lahore, by order dated 24-3-1986. Both of them have now filed separate petitions in this court (Criminal Misc. Nos. 845/B-86 and Criminal Misc. 876/13-86).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the case was false. No private person was made to join the raiding party. The counsel for Ayyaz Hafeez further argued that it would be highly improbable that the petitioner, who was alleged to be semi-naked with a woman in the bed would open the door of the room.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioners were arrested in order to make the raid successful.
6. Counsel finally submitted that the case of the petitioners was at par with those who have been granted bail by the Additional Sessions Judge.
7. I also heard the learned A.A.-G., who opposed the bail application. He submitted that the petitioners were accused of offence against morality. He further submitted that the cases fell within the purview of the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.
8. It is correct that nobody from the public was made to join the raid although it was carried out in a hotel. The fact that number of articles of Hudood Ordinance have been applied indiscriminately shows that the police was not sure upto the last minute as to what was their precise case.
9. There appears to be good deal of force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the case of the present petitioners is at par with those who have been allowed bail by the Additional Sessions Judge.
10. In any case, the allegations levelled against the petitioners call for further inquiry. I, therefore, admit both of them to bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 (Ten thousand) each, with one surety, each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner City, Lahore.