2006 P Cr (PLP)

IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.

Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No.46 of 2005, dated 26-3-2005, registered under section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, VII of 1979 read with section 452, P.P.C. at Police Station Safdarabad, District Nankana on the statement of Muhammad Hanif, the complainant.

2. The brief facts as alleged in the F.I.R. are that on' 25-3-2005 at about 9-00 a.m. in the absence of the complainant and other family members, the petitioner had entered in the house of the complainant by scaling over the wall and committed Zina-bil-Jabr on pistol point with Naheed Akhtar aged 17/18 years' daughter of the complainant. On hue and cry of the victim, Muhammad Tanvir and Abaidullah P.Ws. attracted there, but the petitioner succeeded in fleeing away.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that there was delay of about 24 hours in lodging the F.I.R. without any explanation; that the medical evidence does not support the prosecution case; that the petitioner is behind the bars since 12-5-2005 without any progress in trial and bail cannot be withheld as punishment, and that the petitioner was falsely involved in this case, who is entitled to the grant of bail.

4. The learned State counsel has opposed this bail petition on the ground falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and the bail petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due care and caution.

6. The petitioner has been named in the F.I.R. with specific role of committing Zina-bil-Jabr with victim aged about 17/18 years in her house on pistol point after scaling over the wall when the complainant and other family members were away from the house. Mere delay in lodging the F.I.R. is not fatal to the prosecution story as in such-like cases the honour of the family is involved and before getting registered The case, the complainant has to think over hundred times about its consequences. In the present case, there was no previous enmity or grudge on the part of the complainant for false implication of the petitioner by putting the future life of his virgin daughter at stake. Naheed Akhtar (victim) has also got her statement recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. in which she has supported the contents of F.I.R. There is sufficient material on record to prima facie connect the petitioner with the commission of offence, which falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. The learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to bring the case within the purview of further inquiry.

7. For what has been discussed above, this bail petition being devoid of any force is hereby dismissed.

8. However, the petitioner is behind the bars since 12-5-2005 and challan has also been submitted in the Court of competent jurisdiction, therefore, the learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within 6 months from the receipt of this order. H.B.T./S-155/L Bail refused.