' Mst. Hajran Bibi, the petitioner through the instant petition seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,9, dated 10-1-2003 , registered under section 16/10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood)
Ordinance (VII of 1979), with Police Station Qaboola Sharif, District Pakpattan Sharif.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. Is that on 28-12-2002 at about Asar Waila Allah Rakha and others had enticed her (petitioner) away for Zina.
3. It has been contended on her behalf that she has falsely been roped in on account of family dispute; that her husband/complainant has got registered the case as she has brought suit for dissolution of marriage against him at least 10 days prior to the same; that in fact he (complainant) had kicked her out of the house about 2-1/2 years prior to the institution of the said suit and so the story of her enticement/taking away or elopement with her said co-accused is absolutely false and concocted one; that there is no direct evidence of Zina against her; that she is woman, and mother of five children; and that she is behind the bars and previous non-convict. In support of her bail plea reliance has been placed upon the case of Manzoor Ahmad v. The State 2001 PCr.LJ 1419 and Mst. Kausar Parveen alias Kausar Bibi v. The State 2003 PCr.LJ 397.
4. As against the same, the learned State Counsel has opposed the petition on the ground that she out of illicit liaison with her co-accused Allah Rakha had eloped with him and thereafter they both had indulged in Zina with each other wilfully.
5. I haye carefully considered the submissions made from both sides with the helj of available record.
6. Allegedly, she had been enticed away by her co-accused Allah Rakha and others for Zina. The, incident allegedly had taken place on 28-12-2002 and the case was registered against them on 10- 1-2003. There is with the petition the copy of the plaint in suit for dissolution of marriage Nought by her against the complainant. The same was instituted on 1-1-2001. In para. No,5 of the same, she has averred that the complainant had kicked her out of the house about 2-1/2 years prior to the same i,e, the institution of the suit. The said suit is stated to be pending adjudication before the competent Family Court. Admittedly, there is no direct evidence of Zina against her. Hence, it is yet to be seen that if she can be held liable for the alleged offence. Her case, therefore, is covered under subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Calling for further inquiry into her guilt.
7. She is a woman and stated to be the mother of five children. In these circumstances, I find that the case for her enlargement on bail has been made out. In this regard reference is made to the above-cited cases. Resultantly, this petition is accepted and she is admitted to bail provided she furnishes bail Bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.