' Petitioners Muhammad Javed alias Javed Iqbal, Muhammad Asghar and Muhammad Akram seek bail in a case registered against them and others with Police Station Zafarwal, District Narowal on 25-8-1992 for an offence under section 10/11 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. According to the allegation, first informant had enmity with Muhammad Siddique and Muhammad Sadiq, sons of Rahim Bakhsh who also lived in the same village. Criminal cases were pending between both of them. Muhammad Siddique and his party-men used to raise Lalkaras that they would abduct any woman found alone of complainant's family and would murder her.
First informant's cousin's daughter Mst. Shafqat Bibi, aged about 14/15 years, on 25-8-1992 at about 5 in the morning went out to answer the call of nature. On the way, petitioners alongwith their co- accused forcibly abducted her by putting her in a Datson car and took her away. The occurrence was witnessed by the witnesses. The first informant kept on searching for the abductee and subsequently got the case registered.
2. It was contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that the case against them is absolutely false. Argued that no overt act whatsoever has been ascribed to any of the petitioners in the F.I.R.
Argued that the abductee was recovered and her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Was recorded, wherein she has not levelled any allegation against Muhammad Asghar and Muhammad Akram, petitioners Nos.2 and 3. Argued that all the adult male members and women of the petitioner side have been roped in the case. The contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the State as well as for the complainant. According to them, the alleged abductee in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Has levelled allegation of Zina against petitioner No,1 Muhammad Javed. As far at petitioners Nos.2 and 3, Muhammad Asghar and Muhammad Akram are concerned, they were allegedly present in the Haveli where the abductee was takes and subjected to rape. It was further pointed out that petitioner No,1 Muhammad Javed had applied for bail earlier but the same was dismissed by this Court.
3. I have heard the learned counsel at length and gone through the file. In the F.I.R., the petitioners are named as an accused persons who abducted Mst. Shafqat Bibi. The abductee when recovered, her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Was recorded. She did not level any allegation of Zina against petitioners Nos.2 and 3. She also did not allege that Muhammad Asghar and Muhammad Akram were present in the fields. She, however, levelled allegation of Zina against petitioner No,1 Muhammad Javed alone. In these circumstances, it is clear that the F.I.R. Is at variance with the statement of the abductee which ought to be given more weight. Since no overt act whatsoever is ascribed qua petitioners Nos.2 and 3, Muhammad Asghar and Muhammad Akram, therefore, both of them are allowed bail, provided each of them furnishes security in the sum of Rs,30,000 (Rupees thirty thousand only) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Narowal.
' As far as Muhammad Javed, petitioner No,1, is concerned, he is named by the abductee as a person who committed rape. His earlier bail application was also dismissed by this Court.
Therefore, no ground for releasing him on bail is made out. The application qua Muhammad Javed, petitioner No,1 is dismissed.