1. Office objection is overruled.
2. The facts leading to present application for bail are that applicant/accused Hazar Khan alias Hazaro son of Punhal Shaikh is facing trial before the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Sukkur under sections 11/16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 read with sections 342 and 147, P.P.C. The case arose out of F.I.R. No,112 of 2001 of Police Station "A" Section, Sukkur.
The brief facts of the prosecution case as disclosed in the F.I.R. Lodged by one Mst. Pathani at Police Station "A" Section, Sukkur on 21-11-2001 are reproduced hereinbelow in extenso:- "Complaint is that Mst. Qaima daughter of Ghulam Rasool Leghari aged about 30/35 years is wife of my son Muhammad Hashim Leghari. She was married with my son Hashim according to rites of Islam about 15/16 years back. Out of the said wed-lock she has three (3) daughters and one son.
About 2 months back Mst. Qaima wife of my son went to the house of my daughter Gulzar wife of Muhammad Umar Leghari at Adam 'Shah Colony, Sukkur on a pleasure trip. After few days I went to Adam Shah Colony, Sukkur to the house of my daughter's husband to bring back Mst. Qaima, where, I, found Mst. Qaima missing. On enquiry Muhammad Umar and my daughter Gulzar disclosed that when all were present in the house at noon time accused Manzoor Noon, (2) Hazaro Shaikh, (3) Shahid Shaikh, (4) Khiloo Shaikh and (5) Ismail Machi entered into our house and forcibly took away Mst. Qaima from the house. We raised cries but accused persons did not respond to it and abducted Mst. Qaima by putting her in a Suzuki. On hearing this, I went in search of my daughter-in-law Mst. Qaima on the way one. Faqir Muhammad son of Dil Murad Khoso resident of Dreha met me. He informed me that he had seen Mst. Qaima being abducted. I searched my son's wife at different places but could not succeed, ultimately I sent applications to higher authorities. .Today I submitted an application before S.S.P., Sukkur who endorsed the same to S.H.O., Police Station 'A' Section Sukkur for registration of F.I.R. Hence I have come with application complaining that all the above mentioned accused in furtherance of their common object have kidnapped my son's wife Mst. Qaima to commit Zina-bil-Jabr with her. I complain. Investigation be made."
' The applicant/accused applied for bail before the trial Court but his bail plea was dismissed by impugned order, dated 29th March, 2002.
' I have heard Mr. Abdul Hakeem Bijaranai, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant/accused and Mr. Ghulam Dastagir Shahani, learned Additional Advocate-General on behalf of the State. The latter concedes to the grant of bail.
' The perusal of material placed on record shows that the F.I.R. Is belated by two months and no plausible explanation with regard to inordinate delay has been given in the F.I.R. Though police station is situated at the distance of about 4-5 kilometres from the place of incident. The alleged incident occurred in broad daylight and place of incident is situated in a thickly populated area but not a single independent person from the locality has been cited or examined by the prosecution during the course of investigation to substantiate the allegation of forcible abduction. It is surprising that not a single male person from the family of the complainant went in pursuit of alleged abductee or reported the matter to the police or higher authorities, even no inmate of the house allegedly wherefrom Mst. Qaima was abducted, reported the matter to the police or apprised the Mohalla people. P.W. Faqir Muhammad is a chance witness. The alleged abductee was not recovered from the custody of the applicant/accused but according to prosecution on one fine morning she voluntarily of her own accord appeared at the police station. The Mashirnama as well as medical evidence reveals no mark of violation on the person of the alleged abductee.
' Consequently, I am of the considered view that the case necessitates further enquiry as contemplated under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. The applicant/accused is granted bail in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two lacs) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.