2002 PLP 1976 (MLD)

Sh. Naseem Rashid for the State. Date of hearing: 21st February, 2002. Petitioner seeks post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.81 of 2001 dated. 27‑2‑2002 registered under sections 10 and 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 at Police Station Kot Adu, District Muzaffargarh.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that Abdul Rashid/father of the abductee namely Mst. Rani lodged report on 27‑2‑2001‑ttfat his daughter was abducted by the petitioner and Muhammad Ismail co‑accused on 8‑2‑2001 she was forcibly made to sit in a car with intention to commit Zina with her with help of Mst. Noor Jahan. P.Ws. namely Raees and Khalid saw the accused and Mst. Rani in the car driven by the accused. The efforts were made for the return of Mst. Rani through Punchayat but the accused refused, whereafter, the case was got registered after 19 days of the occurrence.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case that he is behind the bars for the last about ten months and trial has not commenced

4. Learned State Counsel has opposed the bail.

5. Heard. Record perused

6. The case was investigated by different Investigating Officers and incomplete challan was submitted. Subsequently, the investigation was entrusted to D.S.P., Kot Adu, who came to the conclusion that previously similar allegation was made by the complainant against the petitioner through case F.I.R. No. 195 of 2000 dated 28‑7‑2000 registered at Police Station City Kehror Pakka, said case was found false and cancelled. Later on the complainant has roped the petitioner in the present case. The alleged abductee filed W.P. No. 8392 of 2000 in this Court. In para. No.4 of the said petition, she stated that she was wife of the present petitioner. The complainant party has not appeared before the D.S.P. during the investigation. He, after going through the record and the statement of the witnesses stated in Zimni No.21 dated 19‑9‑2001 that the case against the petitioner could not be established, therefore, he prepared cancellation report on 8‑10‑2001. The S.H.O. was directed to submit supplementary challan, wherein, he recommended cancellation of the case. Both incomplete and supplementary challans are to be taken up together, therefore, no final order has been passed in the supplementary challan so far. The petitioner is behind the bars for the last about 10 months. He was found innocent during investigation. The report for cancellation has been submitted by the D.S.P., duly approved by the S.P. The allegation of the complainant, levelled in the belated F.I.R. in view of the cancellation report, submitted by the police brings his case within the ambit of "further enquiry".

7. For the reasons stated above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./Q‑19/L Bail granted.