1986 P Cr (PLP)

Malik Muhammad Rashid Awan for Petitioner. Arshad Khan for the State. Muhammad Tufail petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case registered against him and others under Articles 10, 11 and 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The case was registered on 25th April, 1985 on the report of Muhammad Ramzan, husband of the alleged abductee Mst. Safia Bibi. In the F.I.R. he has alleged that on 19th March, 1985 the petitioner and co‑accused Abdul Majid, Aslam nod Mst. Zainab Bibi took away his wife from his house when he was away to the District Courts. He was informed of the incident by Ali Muhammad, Falak Sher and Muhammad Sultan. He approached the petitioner and co‑accused who confessed their guilt and promised to restore Mst. Safia Bibi to him. On 24th April, 1985 Mst. Safia Bibi, of her own came to him and told him that the petitioner and co‑accused Muhammad Aslam and Abdul Majid had been committing Zina‑bil‑Jabr with her. On 5th May, 1985 Mst. Safia Bibi made statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. wherein she stated that on the 19th March, 1985 Mst. Zainab Bibi took her to her own house and asked her to accompany her to Chak No. 187 for attending a condolence meeting. She accompanied her. The petitioner and co‑accused, Aslam and Majid also joined them, and then all of them boarded a bus and they took her to the house of Abdul Majid in Chak No. 10‑J were the petitioner, co‑accused Aslam and Majid committed Zina‑bil‑Jabr with her. On 11th April, all the accused brought her to Chak Jhumra where she was forced to enter into a marriage contract with Tufail who paid Rs.6,000 to Aslam, Majid and Mst. Zainab Bibi. She lived in the house of Tufail from 11th April to 24th April and during this period he had been committing Zina‑bil‑Jabr with her. On 24th April she slipped away from house of Tufail when his mother and sister were sleeping and be himself was away.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the complainant is a member of gang of swindlers who fleece money from simpletons like the petitioner by offering the hand of a woman in consideration for money. He submits that the complainant, Mst. Zainab Bibi, Abdul Majid and Muhammad Aslam had declared that Mst. Safia Bibi was widow with three children and they performed her Nikah with the petitioner in consideration for. Rs.6,

000. It is submitted that the petitioner was not only deprived of money but has also been falsely implicated in this case.

4. I have gone through the relevant material. In her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. Mst. Safia admitted that after performance of Nikah, Tufail petitioner paid Rs.6,000 to Adam, Majid and Mst. Zainab Bibi through one Ashiq Hussain. There is much substance in the contention that if the petitioner was aware that Mst. Safia was a married woman, he would not part with Rs.6,000 which is a substantial A amount and he would also not keep her in a house where his mother and sister were also residing. In the circumstances, I feel inclined to the view that a case for enlargement of the petitioner is made out. I, therefore, admit him to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Faisalabad. M. Y. H. Bail granted.