1994 P Cr (PLP)

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4848/C/B of 1992, decided on 2nd November, 1992.

S. 497(5)

Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10/11/16

Bail, cancellation of

Bail granted to accused was sought to be cancelled on grounds that at the time bail was granted to accused, though nothing was on record to indicate commission of Zina, but according to report of Chemical Examiner, which had since been received, case against accused had fully been established and accused was still living with co-accused in same house which meant that accused was still committing offence

Litigation between complainant and accused was going on and both of them were levelling allegations against such other

Accused admittedly was living in house of her real paternal-uncle and not with co-accused as was alleged by complainant

No allegation was levelled against accused that she had misused concession of bail

No useful purpose, thus would be served if accused was sent back to jail. Zulfiqar Cheema for Petitioner. The facts leading to the filing of this petition are that the respondent Mst. Amina Bibi, was allowed bail by this Court on 1-7-1992, for offences under sections 10, 11 and 16 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. In support of the present application learned counsel for the petitioner, Mst: Panah Bibi, who is real mother of the respondent, contends that the respondent was allowed bail because at that time there was nothing on the record to indicate the commission of Zina. Submits that now the report of the Chemical Examiner has since been received according to which swabs taken were stained with semen. Asserts that it is respondent's own case that she was living in the house of her co-accused and in such circumstances it would be a conclusive proof that she had indulged in Zina. It is further asserted that the respondent is still living in the same house which means she is still committing the offence. Asserts that the golden ornaments have been recovered from the respondent a which establishes her involvement. Contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the respondent.

2. I have heard the learned counsel and gone through the police file. Respondent was allowed bail on the ground that there was no evidence which could connect her with the commission of Zina. Litigation between the complainant, Mst. Panah Bibi and the respondent is going on. Both of them are levelling allegations against each other. Respondent is living in the house of her real paternal-uncle and a suit for dissolution of marriage has been filed by the respondent. There is no allegation that the respondent had misused the concession of bail. In these circumstances I feel no useful purpose will be served if she is sent back to jail. Therefore I feel it will suffice if a direction to the learned trial Court is given to conclude the trial expeditiously. With this observation petition is disposed of. H.B.T./P-37/1 Petition dismissed.