' Aziz alias Kala petitioner, who is involved in a case under sections 10 and 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered at Police Station Ganda Singh Wala, Kasur, vide F.I.R. No, 102/89 dated 29-5-1989, seeks to be admitted to bail.
2. According to the F.I.R. Lodged by Mst. Surraya Bibi prosecutrix, 7/8 days prior to the registration of the case, Mst. Razia Bihi came to her house and took the prosecutrix with her on the pretext of getting bangles for her from Kasur. When she boarded the wagon, the petitioner also boarded the same wagon. When the wagon reached Petrol Pump Katchery, Mst. Razia Bibi made the prosecutrix to alight from the wagon and so did the petitioner. Thereafter, Mst. Razia Bibi and her brother, the petitioner took her to Sitara Colony, Amar Siddhu Octroi. There Mst. Razia Bibi left the prosecutrix and the petitioner in a house on the pretext that she would be coming after some time. She did not return back for two or three days. It is alleged that during this period the petitioner committed Zina- bil-jabr with her. Razia Bihi also forced her to marry with the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that in the present case the F.I.R. Has been lodged after a considerable delay of 7/8 days and there is no plausible explanation. He also submitted that the statement of Mst. Surraya that Muhammad Shafi and Sadiq have seen her in the company of the petitioner is belied by the version given by her. The medical evidence also does not support the statement of prosecutrix as no marks of violence were found on the person of Mst.
Surrya.
4. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner has been roped in due to enmity and that in all probabilities the prosecutrix should have also been made as accused person whereas the Police has mala fide involved the petitioner in this case.
5. Learned counsel for the State assisted by the Investigating Officer submitted that the challan has been submitted in the Court and the case is fixed for evidence on 6-12-1989 and the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. As principal accused, he is involved in a serious crime and is not entitled to bail.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and having carefully gone through the record of the police, I find that there is some force in the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, because, the girl being habitual to sexual intercourse as per medical report should no be believed per se. I do not want to go deep into the merits lest it may prejudice the case of either party, suffice it to say, that this is a case of further inquiry, hence the petitioner is entitled to bail as a matter of right and 1 admit the petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs,25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Kasur.