1983 P Cr (PLP)

Muhammad Afzal petitioner against whom a case under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) was registered on the 7th June, 1982 with Police Station City, Sheikhupura has come up to this Court for bail after this relief was declined to him by a learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura vide order dated the 7th August, 1982.

2. This case has a history of its own which is depicted through the various orders made in Writ Petition No. 768 of 1982 filed by Mst. Rasulan Bibi the prosecutrix. She sought a declaration that she was major and sut iuris and was at liberty to marry a person of her own choice. The petitioner Mst. Rasulan Bibi was a young lady. Several persons apparently unconnected with her family accompanied her. One of them, namely Nazir, a tongs-driver, stated that she wished to marry him. She too expressed some similar desire. But during the course of the proceedings, it transpired that she was already married with Muhammad Sarwar, her Khalazad. A case about her abduction had also been registered with Police Station Lower Mall in which Nazir aforesaid and his companions were nominated as accused. However, as the girl was married with Muhammad Sarwar, she was persuaded to go to him and live an honourable life. She was allowed to go with her uncle and asked to reflect over the matter and attend the Court on 2-6-1982, She absented on the said date. The explanation for her non-appearance, as given by her uncle, was that she alongwith his own minor daughter was abducted on the previous night. However, both the girls were produced in this Court by S. I. Farzand Ali, Additional S. H. O. Police Station City, Sheikhupura.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecutrix made divergent statements for her absence from this Court on 2-6-1982. In the first instance, she stated that she did not want to appear in this Court, therefore, she disappeared. But, later on, she changed her statement and stated that she was enticed away by some people without naming any one. He submits that no credit could be placed upon a girl with such dubious antecedents. The learned counsel for the State, on the other band, submits that in her statement recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, she has named the present petitioner.

4. Without going into the deeper merit of the submissions, lest the case of either party is prejudiced, but considering the ambient circumstances, particularly the conduct and behaviour of the girl Mst. Rasulan Bibi herself, I am of the view that it is a fit case for further inquiry. Accordingly, I direct d that the petitioner shall be released subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner,. Sheikhupura. Bail granted.