1989 PLP 4865 (MLD)

Mr. Saleem Akhtar for Petitioners. Shaukat Hussain for the State. This is an application for grant of bail filed by Muhammad Nadecm son of Muhammad Khan and Mst. Yasmin wife of Muhammad Sharif in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.245/89, dated 10‑7‑1989 for offences under sections 10 and 18 of Ordinance No. VII of 1979 at P.S. Shad Bagh, Lahore.

2. The petitioners were arrested on 10‑7‑1989 on the allegation that they were committing Zina in the quarter belonging to Muhammad Nadeem petitioner No

1. On a 'Mukhbari' report made to Nazir Ahmad. A.S.I., the quarter of petitioner No.1 was raided and he was allegedly found committing Zina with Mst. Yasmin, petitioner No.2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners having been falsely implicate in the case, He further submits that the F.I.R. does not disclose as to how and where from the raiding party had peeped into the quarter to witness the commission of the offence. Moreover, apart from the averments contained in the F.I.R., there was no corroborative material against the petitioner because Mst. Yasmin was never got medically examined by the police. The statement allegedly made by Mst. Yasmin, petitioner, was denied by her. The learned State counsel has opposed the grant of bail on the ground that the offences alleged against the petitioners fall within the prohibition of section 497 of the Cr.P.C. There appears to be no force in tile contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners. In the absence of the medical evidence, reliance cannot be placed entirely on the mere averments of the F.I.R. regarding the commission of the offence under section 10 of the Ordinance. It is nowhere mentioned that there was any hole or a ventilator through which the members of the raiding party were able to see the commission of the offence inside tile quarter. Moreover, the F.I.R. also contains section 18 of the Ordinance which merely relates to an attempt to commit the offence. If the commission of Zina was really witnessed by the members of the raiding party, mention of section 18 in the F.I.R. is not understandable. The statement allegedly made by Mst. Yasmin before the police has been disowned by her as submitted by her learned counsel. There is no other corroborative evidence in the shape of medical evidence to furnish reasonable ground for believing that the petitioners had committed Zina.

4. For the foregoing reasons, I accept this application and allow bail to the petitioners subject to their furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs.30,000 each will, one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. S.A./M‑1598/L Bail allowed.