ORDER ABDUL HAFEEZ CHEEMA, J.. Mst Mehraj Bibi, daughter of respondent No. 1 already validly wedded to Lal Hussain serving in Armed Forces of Pakistan, was allegedly abducted by the petitioner with the help of his associates and under the cover of a subsequent Nikah conducted by one Sh. Ashfaq Ahmad, Advocate of Lahore they are living as husband and were.
2. Mst. Sahi Bibi, respondent No. 1, the mother of Mst. Mehraj Bibi lodged case FIR No. 246/93 at P.S. Syedwala, District Sheikhupura under Section 16 read with Section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The case was found false by the police investigation and the accused were discharged. Subsequently, the complainant was obliged to i.e a private complaint and in that connection the matter is with the trial Court at Nankana Sahib.
3. The petitioner applied for his pre-arrest bail which was rejected and ^he was taken into custody.
His after arrest bail equally met the same fate. He has filed this application for his bail.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks bail of the petitioner on the grounds that the case is false; that the petitioner was rightly discharged by the police; that the petitioner is husband of Mst.
Mehraj Bibi through a Nikah conducted by Sh. Ashfaq Ahmad, Advocate of Lahore at his residence; that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner has not committed any offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
5. The bail has been opposed by the learned State counsel on the ground that this is a clear and visible instance of adulterous intercourse between the petitioner and Mst. Mehraj Bibi inasmuch as she was lawfully wedded were of Lal Hussain. The petitioner, however, took advantage of the absence of her husband and abducted her for illicit intercourse and the Nikah conducted in the circumstance by an Advocate has no legal sanctity at all.
6. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
7. The Nikah performed by the parents of Mst. Mehraj Bibi with Lal Hussain appears to be a valid transaction. On the other had, the subsequent Nikah in the presence of earlier Nikah has no validity in law. The co-habitation of the parties, therefore, appears to be adulterous. Even otherwise, the case in the trial Court is complete in all respects and only the statements of the accused under Section 342 Cr.P.C, remain to be recorded. No valid grounds have been shown for admittance of the petitioner to bail. The application is, therefore, dismissed. Anyhow, after the announcement of the order learned counsel for the petitioner proposed to withdraw the petition. Since the order has been announced as such no action is warranted on this request. Learned trial Court is, however, directed to complete the trial within a month under intimation to the Deputy Registrar (Jud1.) of this Court.