RIAZ KAYANI, J.- Learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to press the bail petition of petitioner No. 1 which is dismissed to his extent.
2. Petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 seek bail in a case FIR No. 5/98 registered under sections 16, 10(3) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) read with sections 468, 471, 109, 342, 337-J, PPC at Police Station Civil Lines, Bahawalpur, recorded at the instance of Muhammad Aslam son of Fazzal Ahmad.
3. Briefly the prosecution version as given in the FIR is that Mst. Nasrin Bibi daughter of Aziz-ur- Rehman was married to Muhammad Aslam on 12.7.1997. Said Nasrin used to visit the house of Hafiz Muhammad Akram for taking lesson in the Holy Quran. Talib Hussain accused related closely to Hafiz Muhammad Akram developed illicit relation with his wife Nasrin Bibi. On 21.12.1997 it is stated that he alongwith his father-in-law Aziz-ur-Rehman went to his agricultural land-and on his return at MAGHRAB WELA they found Nasrin missing from the house. On search they reached Lorri Adda where the witnesses named in the FIR told them that his wife Nasrin was seen in a Tonga alongwith Hafiz Muhammad Akram, Talib Hussain, Muhammad Ashraf, Nawaz, Ghulam Hussain and Ghulam Haider going towards the BASTI. They were told on their enquiry from the above-named persons, that since Nasrin was un-well she was being taken to the hospital for treatment. It is stated in the FIR that the first informant alongwith his father-in-law went to the house of the accused who admitted having abducted Nasrin Bibi and promised to return her within a few days. Talib Hussain alongwith brothers Hafiz Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Ashraf, Nawaz and Ghulam Haider enticed his wife for the purposes of committing zina and abducted her.
4. After the recovery of Mst. Nasrin Bibi her statement was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C, on 16.3.1998. She stated that on 21.12.1997 she went to the house of Maulvi Muhammad Akram to take lesson of Holy Quran and found petitioner present there in a Tonga and on a false pretext made her sit in a Tonga and took her away and administered sweet meats to her which made her unconscious. Upon regarding consciousness she found herself in a room and was made to sign some blank papers and kept her confined for a month/1-1/2 month in the room where petitioner No. 1 Talib kept on committing zina-bil-jabr with her. Due to the efforts of her family members she was released and after she recovered from her ailment she was brought to the police station and as such she recorded her statement.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the statement of Mst. Nasrin Bibi under section 164 Cr.P.C, was a total lie and that she eloped with petitioner No. 1 Talib Hussain after seeking divorce from the first informant Muhammad Aslam and later on married Talib Hussain of her on free will vide Nikah Nama dated 22.11.1997.
6. At this stage I am not going to enquire into the validity of the nikah nama. Suffice it to say that in the FIR it has been stated by the first informant that Mst. Nasrin Bibi was married on 12.7.1997. Even otherwise the learned counsel for the petitioners has not pressed the bail application of petitioner No. 1.
7. As far as petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 are concerned learned Counsel states that there is delay of 5 days in getting the case registered. The role attributed to petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 is that they facilitated the commission of offence of abduction. Apart from this there is no other evidence to connect them with the commission of offence.
8. Muhammad Ashraf is the real brother of Talib Hussain, whereas Muhammad Nawaz petitioner No. 3 is the husband of sister of Talib Hussain petitioner No. 1 while Ghulam Haider is the uncle of Talib Hussain petitioner No. 1. It is yet to be seen and decided by the trial Court whether petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 facilitated the commission of offence and as such are involved under section 109 PPC, for present prima facie case against petitioners Nos. 2 to 4 is that they accompanied petitioner No. 1 alongwith Nasrin Bibi. In such like cases an attempt is always made to rope all the male members of the family so that no one is left behind to arrange for the defence of the main accused. A case of further inquiry, is, therefore, made out against petitioners Nos. 2 to 4. I, therefore, enlarge them on bail provided they furnish bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.