' Muhammad Yunus petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case registered against him under Article 18 of Ordinance VII, 1979.
2. The prosecution version is that on 28th May, 1988 at 10 a.m. Mst. Kausar Parveen was returning home after purchasing some vegetables. When she reached near the house of the petitioner he held her by her arm and forcibly took her inside the house where he put his hand on her Azarband and felled her on the ground. She held her Azarband firmly and raised alarm attracting Bashir Ahmad and Saleh Muhammad. On seeing them, the petitioner decamped through the roofs of the houses. Mst. Kausar Parveen reported the occurrence on the following day at 9-30 a.m.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is an unexplaineddelay of twenty-four hours in reporting the occurrence and on the facts stated in the F.I.R., at best, a case under section 354, P.P.C. Is made out. In support of the contention he has relied on Javaid v. The State 1985 SCMR 1443 Shariat Appellate Bench. The learned State counsel does not oppose the prayer.
4. A I have considered the submissions made at the Bar. The F.I.R. Was lodged twenty-four hours after the occurrence and no reasonable explanation has been offered for the delay. The petitioner was arrested on the very day the case was registered and is in jail for the last more than eight months. In the circumstances, I admit him to bail in the sum of Rs,20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Bhalwal.