2007 PLP 2683 (YLR)

IQBAL HAMEED-UR-REHMAN, J.

The petitioner Atif Ali Shahzad seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No.207, dated 8-5-2006 registered under sections 10(2) and 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 at Police Station Mumtaz Abad, District Multan.

2. The allegation against the. petitioner as contained in the F.I.R. is that he abducted Mst. Saadia Bibi and also committed Zina-bil-Jabr with her.

3. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the F.I.R. has been lodged with a delay of 5 days, in particular when the occurrence had come to the knowledge of he complainant on the same day and no explanati6n has been given and such delay is fatal to the prosecution case; that the petitioner was arrested on 25-5-2006 whereas the alleged recovery of the abductee was effected even prior to the arrest of the petitioner; that there is no witness regarding. the abduction against the petitioner and under section 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, case of no evidence becomes a case of further inquiry, in this behalf reliance is placed upon Akhtar Ali v. The State' 2004 PCr.LJ 1841; that the petitioner has to appear, in the B.Sc. Examination to be held on 4-12-2006 and therefore-, on compassionate ground, he is entitled to bail and that according to the Code of Criminal Procedure Amendment Ordinance, 2006, (Amendment in section 497(1), Cr.P.C.), the concession given to a lady is-also to be provided to a man and even according to Injunctions of Islam and under Article 25 of tie Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the same entitled the petitioner to grant of bail On the other hand, learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner has been fully involved by the victim in her statements under sections 161 and 164, Cr.P.C.; that recovery of the abductee was made from the petitioner and this fact is mentioned in the order, dated 18-7-2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan while rejecting the bail application of the petitioner; that reports of the Medical Officer as well as Chemical Examiner are in the positive .and that challan has been submitted in the Court and the case is fixed for evidence for 7-12-2006. Arguments heard. Record perused. The petitioner has committed a very heinous offence with a minor girl whom the complainant and her parents had engaged for tuition. He had not only lost the trust of the complainant but has completely destroyed the life of a minor girl by committing Zina-bil-Jabr. -The abductee/victim has fully implicated the petitioner in this heinous offence by making statements under sections 161 and 164, A Cr.P.C. Delay of 4/5 days in lodging of the F.I.R. in such cases is not fatal to the prosecution case as the people naturally avoid rushing to the police station in the first instance because of the:. family honour and usually make attempts to recover their victim. The offence falls within the, prohibitory clause. The petitioner has been finally implicated in this heinous offence against not only the victim but against the society and such-like people .in my view do not deserve to be granted bail in exercise of the discretionary powers under section.

497. Cr.P.C. Even challan has been submitted in the Court and the case has been fixed for evidence for 7-12-2006.

7. In view of the above circumstances, this bail petition is dismissed. H.B.T./A-174/L Bail refused.