' This is an application for bail after arrest on behalf of Muhammad Ishaq and Muhammad Sadiq.
According to the F.I.R., on 7-9-1998 the complainant's daughter namely Mst. Rahat Bano aged 15/16 years left the house in order to inform her neigbourers about 'Meelad' ceremony at her house. Later on, when she did not turn up the complainant tried to locate her. The complainant was told that Mst. Rahat Bano was seen in the company of Muhammad Ishaq petitioner and her sister Mst.
Jameela. It was also stated in the. F.I.R. That Muhammad Ishaq used to visit the house of the complainant and it came to the knowledge of the complainant that Muhammad Ishaq had developed illicit relations with Mst. Rahat Bano.
2. After having failed to get bail after arrest from the Special Court No,2, Lahore, both the petitioners have moved this Court.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that in fact Rahat Bano had entered into marriage with Muhammad Ishaq petitioner according to her own free will, copy of the Nikahnama is also attached with this file. He submits that Nikah Registrar had also appeared before the Investigating Officer and had verified the genuineness of Nikahnama by submitting an affidavit. He submits that only allegation against Muhammad Sadiq is of abduction. He also submits that suit for restitution of conjugal rights filed by Muhammad Ishaq petitioner in the Civil Court is still pending. Adds that there is a delay of 30 hours in lodging the F.I.R. He also submits that although, it was alleged that Rabat Bano was recovered on 10-9-1998 but her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Was recorded on 27-11-1998 without any plausible explanation. He adds that there was no mark of violence on the body of Rahat Bano when she was medically examined on 27-11-1998. He has referred Annexure 'C' an Arbitration decision in which it was written by one Haji Sh. Irshad Ullah, Chairman Ushr and Zakat Committee, Ward No,78, that Mst. Rahat Bano had categorically stated before him that she had entered into Nikah with her own wishes and Muhammad Ishaq had never abducted her.
4. On the other hand learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the grant of bail to the petitioners and submits that the offence alleged against the petitioners falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497(1), Cr.P.C.
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In the instant case there is delay of 30 hours in lodging the F.I.R. Without any plausible explanation. There is a nikahnama on the record between Muhammad Ishaq petitioner and Rahat Bano, there is also an Arbitration decision given by one Haji Sh. Irshadullah, Chairman Ushr and Zakat Committee, which is also on the file. In arbitration proceedings 4 Advocates had also taken part and in their presence Mst. Rahat Bano had admitted to have entered into nikah with Muhammad Ishaq and denied the allegation of abduction against Muhammad Ishaq. Muhammad Ishaq has also filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights which is also pending before the Judge Family Court. There is one Javaid against whom the allegation of zina was levelled by Rahat Bano but after her return to the house of her parents she did not identify the said Javaid in the Court and stated that there was sonde other Javaid who has not been arrested in this case till today. All these factors make this case of further inquiry as regards to Muhammad Ishaq. As far as Muhammad Sadiq petitioner is concerned there is no allegation of zina against him. In this view of the matter a case of further inquiry is made out in favour of is bail on bail both the petitioners. We accept the petition and allow the petitioners provided they furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 (fifty thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Lahore.