1. The applicant is standing trial before the Sessions Judge, Hyderabad alongwith co-accused Raza Muhammad and Muhammad Sadiq for having committed offences under section 11, 18, 10 and 3 of Zina Hudood Ordinance and section 3 and 4 of Prohibition of Hudood Ordinance, read with section 342, P.P.C.
2. The case of prosecution against the applicant is, that on 24-11-1985 at about 2.00 p.m. He abducted one Mst. Lubna, a student of Government Girls College, Hyderabad in his car while she was waiting at the bus stop near Central Jail, Hyderabad. It is then alleged that after taking her round that city for about five hours, he took her to the house of co-accused Raza Muhammad and Muhammad Sadiq. At that time Raza Muhammad was taking liquor. Thereafter, after leaving the girl there, the applicant is said to have left the place. It is then alleged that later co-accused Raza Muhammad tried to molest Mst. Lubna as a result of which she raised cries. That attracted the neighbours including one Bashir Khan, a Councillor of the area. They then called the police and Raza Muhammad was arrested alongwith co-accused Muhammad Sadiq and the girl was recovered from their house. During the investigation it later transpired that applicant Syed Imtiaz had abducted Mst. Lubna. Thereafter, the applicant 'was arrested and later challaned with the co- accused to stand trial before the Sessions Court at Hyderabad. The applicant filed his bail application before the learned Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, which was rejected by him vide order, dated 2-12-1985 and hence, the instant application. The contention of Mr. Qurban Ali Chohan, the learned counsel for the applicant is, that the only allegations against the applicant are that he had picked up Mst. Lubna from the gate of Central Jail, Hyderabad, in his car and thereafter, took her to the house of co-accused Raza Muhammad and Muhammad Sadiq. The learned-counsel has contended that admittedly when an attempt was being made by co-accused Raza Muhammad to molest Mst. Lubna, the applicant was not present in the house of the accused. The learned counsel has further argued that since the girl was a student of Inter, -definitely above sixteen years of age.
3. The further contention of the learned counsel has been that according to the prosecution case itself, Mst. Lubna had been taken A by the applicant for a drive around the city of Hyderabad for five hours, therefore, it is hard to believe that she went with the applicant against her wish.
4. I have also heard Mr. Manghi the learned A.A.-G. And he has also conceded that this case requires further inquiry. The learned A.A. -G., therefore, does not object to the grant of bail to the applicant.
5. I, therefore, grant bail to the applicant in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety and P.R. Bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.