' NAZIR AHMAD BHATTI, J.--- Mst. Kanzal Bibi daughter of complainant Abdul Latif was taken out of her house on 20-3-1988 at about 7-00 p.m. By Mst. Shafa Begum wife of Munawar, Mst. Rehana Kausar daughter of Muhammad Anwar and Mst. Fauzia daughter of Sardar Khan on the pretext of easing themselves. She did not return to the house even after a long time whereupon her father started searching for her. The complainant was informed by Muhammad Ashraf and Bashir Ahmad that they had seen Mst. Kanzal Bibi in the company of Ghias Ahmad and Muhammad Rafique, both appellants herein, and Muhammad Khan, Muhammad Anwar, Sardar Khan, Tahir and the aforesaid three females. Both the appellants were armed with rifles at that time and the other accused had sticks with them. The father of the girl Abdul Latif complainant made a written report of the occurrence in Police Station Kunjah on 2-4-1988.
2. Mst. Kanzal Bibi was found on 16-4-1988. She was medically examined on 17-4-1988, according to which she had been subjected to sexual intercourse beyond 21 days. All the accused mentioned in the report were sent up for trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat who charged all of them under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. Appellant Ghias Ahmad alias Shado was also charged under section 10(3) of the Hudood Ordinance for committing Zina-bil-Jabr with Mst. Kanzal Bibi. All the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed trial. After the conclusion of the trial the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted both the appellants Ghias Ahmad and Muhammad Rafique under section 11 of the Hudood Ordinance. Appellant Ghias Ahmad was also convicted under section 10(3) of the Hudood Ordinance. For the offence under section 11 of the Hudood Ordinance both the appellants were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, to suffer 30 stripes and to pay a fine of Rs,10,000 or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. For the offence under section 10(3) of the Hudood Ordinance appellant Ghias Ahmad was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and to suffer 30 stripes. Both the appellants have challenged their convictions and sentence by the appeal in hand.
3. It was the case of the complainant that his daughter Mst. Kanzal Bibi was already married to one Iftikhar but Rukhsati had not taken place, but no evidence in this respect was brought on the record. Besides the oral testimony of the complainant and the prosecutrix there is no other evidence on the record to prove the allegation of Nikah of the girl with Iftikhar Ahmad. The latter was also not produced in evidence to prove the said allegation. Also no Nikahnama or any witness of Nikah or Nikah Khawan were produced in corroboration of the said allegation.
4. The occurrence took place on 20-3-1988 and at least 2 persons, whose names have been disclosed in the report had informed the complainant on the same day that his daughter had been seen by them in the company of the accused and she was riding a horseback sitting behind appellant Ghias Ahmad but still a delay of 14 days was made in reporting the occurrence in the police station.
5. It had also come in evidence that there was previous blood feud enmity between both the parties. None of the accused was apprehended alongwith the prosecutrix when she was recovered on 16-4-1988. According to her own statement Mst. Kanzal Bibi had spent about 25 days with appellant Ghias Ahmad and she was taken to many places and she could have many opportunities to escape from the custody of the appellant but she did not make any effort in that regard. This would also show that she had not been abducted by any body and was living with appellant Ghias Ahmad of her own free will. She had admitted that after her recovery her father had met her and narrated the whole story of the F.I.R. To her. Thereafter her police statement was recorded wherein she repeated exactly the same circumstances which had been disclosed in the F.I.R. That would also show that she had been tutored and a false abduction story had been fabricated.
6. Appellant Ghias Ahmad had also made the following deposition in his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C.:-- "Due to enmity. Lal Khan, my father was murdered by complainant and his brother. Complainant and his brother were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in that case. They sustained enmity for the last about 20 years and due to that enmity and out of revenge they have implicated our family members in case falsely. Due to the subsisting enmity for the last 20 years, none of us is on visiting terms with them nor we have any connection with any of them. Mst. Kanzal Bibi was not abducted by us. She had willingly contracted marriage with me and I later on filed a suit for conjugal rights and Mst. Kanzal Bibi filed a suit for dissolution of marriage. Civil suits were still pending, when Mst. Kanzal Bibi was meanwhile murdered by complainant party and in collusion with near relatives got a case registered against Iftikhar; my relative. That case is still pending. The complainant party murdered Mst. Kanzal Bibi because they entertained the belief that in civil Court, she will express her will to accompany her husband (me) and in order to avoid that, they had murdered her."
7. The allegation of Nikah of appellant Ghias Ahmad with Mst Kanzal Bibi also finds support from the testimony of the girl. In her cross-examination she admitted that she had filed suit for dissolution of her marriage against the appellant and the latter had filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against her. All the aforesaid circumstances would show that the State had failed to prove any of the offences against both the appellants. No credible evidence was brought on the record either to prove the allegation of abduction of Mst. Kanzal Bibi by the appellant or of the commission of Zina- bil-Jabr by appellant Ghias Ahmad with Mst. Kanzal Bibi.
8. For the aforesaid reasons we accept the appeal. Both the appellants are acquitted of the offence for which they were convicted and sentenced. They shall be set at liberty forthwith if not wanted in any other case.