S.M.ZUBAIR, J.- The petitioner who is involved in a case under Sections 10/16 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance VII of 1979, arising out F.I.R. No. 144/92, dated 5.7.1992, registered at Police Station Lalian District Jhang, seeks to be admitted to bail.
2. Briefly the allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R, is that he enticed away Mst. Kalsoom with the intention to commit zina with her.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last more than one year without any progress in the trial; that the version given in the F.I.R.; is highly improbable as two wives of the petitioner could not formally facilitate the abduction of the alleged abductee there is no direct evidence against the petitioner except the statement of the abdicate who is herself an accused person in this case, hence the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail.
4. The learned counsel for the State assisted by the Police Officer, has opposed this bail application on the ground that in view of the amendment in law, the Concession of one year is not available.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. There is substantial force in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that nobody can be kept behind the bars by way of punishment without there being any trial. Admittedly, the petitioner is in the jail for the last more than one year and the amendment made by the Ordinance has since ceased to exist. The petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Chiniot.