1997 P Cr (PLP)

Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner (in Criminal Miscellaneous No.2296/13 of 1996. Kabeer Mehmood for Petitioner (in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1703/B of 1996). Sh. Muhammad Rahim for the State. This order shall dispose of Criminal Miscellaneous No.2296/B of 1996 and Criminal Miscellaneous No.1703/B of 1996 as both arise out of the same case F.I.R. No.227 of 1996, dated 17-8-1996 under section 16/10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, VII of 1979, Police Station Gaggo, Tehsil Burewala, District Vehari, registered on the statement of Ghulam Abbas, complainant.

2. The prosecution story as given in the F.I.R. briefly stated is that complainant's younger sister Mst. Nazran, the alleged abductee had married Fazil. On 14th of August, 1996, he came to the house of complainant and in the evening Qutab Din petitioner alongwith his wife came to complainant's house and took away Mst. Nazran on the pretext of some work. As she did not return till late night, complainant made queries from Qutab Din and he was told that Mst. Nazran had gone with Muhammad Ashraf son of the petitioner and that they will come back after a little while but despite that she never returned. A Punchayat was convened but the same was also of no avail. It was alleged that Qutab Din petitioner, and his wife, had abducted Mst. Nazran and that she was being detained by Muhammad Ashraf petitioner's son who is committing Zina with her. The allegation against petitioner Rustam Ali (in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1703/13 of. 1996) is that of abetment.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Qutab Din seeks bail on the grounds that there is a delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R.; that it is unbelievable that Qutab Din petitioner who is aged 60 years would be party to the immoral act of Zina which is alleged against his son Muhammad Ashraf and that there is no tenable evidence to connect the petitioner with the offence alleged. Learned counsel for the petitioner Rustam Ali, seeks confirmation of his bail on the grounds that petitioner is a Lumberdar of the area and that he has been falsely implicated on account of party faction.

4. Investigating Officer, appearing in Court submits that as per his investigation Rustam Ali petitioner has been involved on account of party faction; that he had only intervened in the matter during Punchayat and had reprimanded the complainant that he should put a check on his daughter Mst. Nazran and that was why he had been falsely implicated.

5. Learned counsel for the State, in all fairness submits that although the allegation levelled against the petitioners connect them with an offence, which alls in the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., yet the fact remains that petitioner Qutab Din is aged 60 years and Rustam petitioner is a Lumberdar of the area and there is no allegation of abduction against him.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record.

7. It is not denied that petitioner Qutab Din is aged 60 years. The allegation that he sent Mst. Nazran with his son Ashraf for commission of Zina, prima facie would require further inquiry. So far as Rustam Ali petitioner is concerned, it is not denied that he is maternal-uncle of Ashraf co-accused who has allegedly committed Zina with Mst. Nazran and in view of the statement made by the Investigating Officer, the possibility cannot be ruled out that he was falsely implicated for mala fide reasons. In view of the above, I am inclined to admit petitioner Qutab Din to bail in case F.I.R. No.227 of 1996, dated 17-8-1996 Police Station Gaggol provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, Section 30 concerned. The pre-arrest bail granted to Rustam petitioner vide this Court's Order, dated 26-9-1996 is also confirmed. N.H.Q./Q-5/L Petition allowed.