1. A case is registered against tile petitioner under section 363/366/376, P. P. C. The allegation against him is that he enticed away and abducted Mst. Sakina alias Zohra aged 141 years. The F. I. R. In this case was lodged after delay of one month. 7 he reason given in the F. I. R. For the delay is that the complainant namely Muhammad Nawaz father of the girl bad been approaching the petitioner for the purpose of getting the girl restored but he lodged the report when the petitioner had refused to restore the girl to him. Alter the registration of the case against the petitioner when Mst. Sakina alias Zohra was recovered from his possession she made a statement which is on the file. From this statement it appears that she had gone with the petitioner on her own accord. She has also stated that although she was not married to the petitioner she bad illicit relations with him. The point that has been raised in this case is that according to the birth certificate placed on the record by the father of this girl she was minor at the time of occurrence whereas according to the certificate placed on the record by the petitioner she was major. The Medical Officer who examined Mst.
2. Sakina alias Zohra has given an opinion to the effect that she was used to sexual intercourse. The question as to whether the girl was minor or major is yet to be determined. Anyway the statement of the girl indicates that she received a letter from the petitioner in which it was suggested that she should meet him on the road at 9 o'clock on a specified date and that he would then take her away. In response of this letter she waited for the petitioner at the agreed spot where she had gone with another girl called Kalsoom. From this it appears that she went with the petitioner on her own accord. She has further stated that she was carrying on illicit relations with the petitioner but was not married to him. Learned counsel for the State argues that if it was determined eventually that she was minor then the petitioner would prima facie have committed an offence under section 366, P. P. C. Whereunder the maximum sentence is of ten years and he would-- therefore, not be entitled to be released on bail. On the other hand learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the birth certificate which he has placed on the record of the girl in question was correct and if she was major. Then the petitioner had not committed any offence under section 366 or 363 or under section 376. P. P. C. According to him the girl was major and had gone with the petitioner on her own accord because she had an illicit affair with him. I do not wish to comment on the evidence at this stage but I am, of the view that it is a fit case in which the petitioner should be allowed bail. He is allowed bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs. 5,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Jhang.