1. ' The applicant is facing trial in an offence under section 11/16 of Zina Hudood Ordinance arising out of Crime No,99 of 1999, Police Station Waggan.
2. ' On 15-8-1999 one Hubdar Ali lodged First Information Report with Police Station Waggan narrating therein that he had married Mst. Amiran about 15 years back. It is stated that one Umar Peshawar has a house adjacent to them. They are on visiting terms to each other. The complainant has further stated that about 2/3 months prior to the lodging of this F.I.R., he developed a suspicion that accused Allah Dino had illicit connections with his wife Mst. Amiran. He enquired from wife but she refused to admit such connections with Allah Dino. The complainant has further stated in his F.I.R.
3. That about one month and seven days back he had gone for his work as usual and when he came back at evening time, he found his wife Mst. Amiran and daughters Baby Sonahri and Nusrat not available in the house. His mother and daughter informed him that they had gone to take medicine from the Waggan Town. He searched for them but could not find any clue. It is urged by the complainant that his relative namely Abdul Ghaffar and Abdul Jabbar came and informed him that about a week back they had seen accused Allah Dino and Abdul Khalique while taking his wife and daughters to Waggan Town. On their enquiries, they stated that they were going to take medicine for Mst. Amiran as she was ailing and since then all the Three accused are not available in their house. The complainant contacted Umar father of the accused and also made complaints to Naikmards, thereafter the complainant lodged First Information Report.
4. ' The police after registration of F.I.R. Took up investigation.
5. ' It is contended by Mr. Abdul Haq Solangi learned counsel for the applicant that F.I.R. Is belated by about one month and seven days and no plausible explanation has been furnished by the complainant. It is stated that the First Information Report is lodged on the basis of information, conveyed to complainant by P.Ws. Abdul Ghaffar and Abdul Jabbar, after one month and seven days of the incident when they allegedly saw the accused taking away the lady. The statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Of Mst. Amiran was recorded before Resident Magistrate, Dadu on 30-8- 1999 wherein she stated that she was declared to be Kari by her husband Manzoor and therefore she apprehends that she may be killed by him and therefore, she prayed that she may be remanded to Darul Aman. It is argued that after about 20 days thereafter she was again produced before Resident Magistrate, Dadu and she made a statement reiterated the same facts as in. Her earlier statement but she added to it that she wants to go with her father. The Magistrate on the basis of this statement set her at liberty and she accompanied her father. Both the aforesaid 164, Cr.P.C. Statements are Produced on record. It is argued that in view of these statements of the victim lady, there are no reasonable grounds available on the record to show that the lady was forcibly abducted or any illicit intercourse was committed with her.
6. ' Mr. Ali Azhar Tunic learned Assistant Advocate-General has stated his no objection to the grant of bail to accused and has stated. That she has given bristling statements at various stages before the First Class Magistrates. He has further stated that on 27-9-1999 she again made 164, Cr.P.C.
7. Statement before Judicial Magistrate, Warrah in which she has implicated the present applicant but according to him she has in all made three 164, Cr.P.C. Statements which required scrutiny at the time of trial and at this stage the case of further enquiry is made out.
8. The record reveals that there was no eye-witness to this incident. The F.I.R. Is lodged after one month and seven days. The lady was produced before First Class Magistrate on 30-8-1999 and 20- 9-1999. In her statements she had not stated that she was abducted by anybody or any illicit intercourse was committed with her by the accused. It is only on 27-9-1999 when her 164, Cr.P.C.
9. Statement was recorded and she for the first time implicated the present accused. There is no evidence on record connecting the accused with commission of offence except the belated 164, Cr.P.C. Statements of victim lady whose statements cannot be believed in to at this stage as there are three 164, Cr.P.C. Statements of the lady on record. The reference is made to Abbas Ali v. The State (1976 SCM R 157) and Risaldar Miran Bux v. Nazar Karim and others (1978 PCr.LJ 519).
10. ' In view of these facts and circumstances, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is guilty of an offence with which he is charged, as such, he is granted bail in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (one lac) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court.