Abdullah petitioner through the instant petition seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.181 dated 4- 6-2002, under sections 10/11 and 16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Police Station, Mehmood Kot, Tehsil Kot Addu, District Muzaffargarh.
2. The prosecution story as contained in F.I.R. Briefly stated is that Abdullah (petitioner) was neighbourer of the complainant in Mohallah Alla-abad, near the Police Station, Mumtazabad, Multan. He developed illicit intimacy with his daughter Mst. Nasim Mai and due to the same they remained meeting each other secretly. On 5-1-2002, he in the absence of her husband in the house enticed her away from the house alongwith her virgin sister Mst. Nasreen aged about 15/16 years for Zina.
3. The bail has been sought by him on the ground that he has falsely been roped in; that there is six months delay in lodging the F.I.R.; that the complainant Nazir Ahmad and Mst. Nasim Mai have made the statement on 30-11-2002 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kot Addu to the effect that he has not abducted her and her sister Mst. Nasreen Bibi and they did not want to pursue the case and have no objection on the grant of bail to him; that the only prosecution witness in this case Manzoor Hussain has also made statement before the said learned Additional Sessions Judge to the effect that he had not witnessed the occurrence and on the basis of their statements, the case against him has become one of further enquiry ; and that he is behind the bars for the last about 9 months and is previous non-convict.
4. The bail petition has been opposed by the learned State Counsel on the ground that he is named in the F.I.R.; that he has enticed away two daughters of the complainant namely Mst.
Nasreen and Mst. Nasim and then had been subjecting them to Zina-bil-Jabr; and that he on the basis of the material on record is sufficiently connected with the crime.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the parties, with the help of available record.
6. There is about six months' delay in lodging the F.I.R. Besides this, there is with the petition the certified copy of the statement recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kot Addu on 30-11-2002 or the complainant Nazir Ahmad. The same is to the effect that he has satisfied himself that Abdullah (petitioner) has not abducted his daughters and he is innocent. He has further stated that he does not want to prosecute the case any more and has no objection on the grant of bail to him. There is also statement of one of the alleged abductees in this case namely Mst. Nasreen Bibi of the same date recorded by him. The same is also to the same effect. One said to be an eye- witness or, the incident namely Manzoor Hussain has also made statement the same day there.
The same, is to the effect that he has not seen the occurrence. Though according to the learned State Counsel, there is on record statement or Mst. Nasreen Bibi under section 161, Cr.P.C. In which she has implicated him (petitioner.) with the offence but in view of the aforesaid statement of the complainant and his daughter Mst. Nasim Mai and the said P.W. The case against him has become open to further enquiry. The same, therefore, is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
He is stated to be behind the bars for the last about 9 months and a previous non-convict. In these circumstances, I accept this petition and admit him to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.