' The brief facts of the case are that Muhammad Asghar lodged report in Police Station, Wah Cantt.
On 19-4-1993 to the effect that his sister Mst. Asiya Pervin aged 18/19 years has been abducted for illicit purpose. The case was registered vide F.I.R. No,201 on the same day under section 10/11/16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. In this case there are 4 other accused out of which Hakam Khan expired while the other three are on bail. The respondent was granted bail by Honourable Mr. Justice Riaz-ud-pin Ahmad, vide order, dated 7-3-1994.
2. The complainant/petitioner has now filed this Criminal Miscellaneous seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respondent/accused Ijaz Ahmad mainly on the ground that he sought bail from this Honourable Court by way of misrepresentation. He contends that the perusal of the order granting bail will show that it was stated before the Court that F.I.R. Was lodged after the delay of two months, whereas the factual position is that there is delay of hardly two days. In the estimation of the learned counsel for the petitioner this fact is sufficient to withdraw the bail granted to the respondent/accused.
3. On the other hand, cancellation petition is opposed vehemently by the learned counsel for the respondent/accused. He states that three other co-accused are on bail. The respondent was granted bail for cogent reasons and he had not misused this privilege of bail. The important factor in this case is as to whether the abductee and accused Ijaz Ahmad are husband and wife or not.
The validity of Nikahnama produced by the respondent is sub judice before the learned Judge, Family Court. An issue to this fact has already been framed. The case has now been fixed for evidence. In addition to this, proceedings in the criminal case have been stayed till the validity of the Nikahnama is finally adjudicated upon by the Court of competent jurisdiction. The respondent remained in jail for a sufficient long time and thereafter he was granted bail on the grounds that he vehemently and consistently claimed to be husband of the alleged abductee. For this very reason he has already filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against Mst. Asiya Pervin the alleged abductee. According to him Mst. Asiya Pervin is his wedded wife. But subsequently under undue influence and pressure of her parents and the police, she made an incorrect statement involving the petitioner in the commission of alleged crime.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and record perused. To my mind the misrepresentation referred by the learned counsel for the petitioner is a typographical mistake.
Instead of word "days", word "months" was typed in the judgment, otherwise there was no reason to write it, as the copy of the F.I.R. Was on the record, wherein it is clearly mentioned that the report was lodged after the delay of two days. As far as the other grounds are concerned, the same are quite convincing to grant bail and there is no occasion to make any comments about that aspect of the case.
5. In view of the above, I see no substance in the petition. The Criminal Miscellaneous No,247/CB of 1994 is dismissed. However, the Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible in accordance with law.