ALLAH NAWAZ Versus THE STATE

ORDER

1. Petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case registered against him and his co‑accused Rasul Bakhsh under section 11 of Ordinance VII of 1979 and section 14 of Ordinance VI of 1979.

2. The prosecution version is that Mst. Shamim Akhtar developed relations with co‑accused Rasul Bakhsh and was on visiting terms with him. On 24‑4‑1986, aforesaid Rasul Bakhsh and the petitioner took away Mst. Shamim Akhtar from the house of her brother Mubarik Ali. On the way, Rasul Bakhsh told Ibrahim and Khalid Hussain that Mst. Shamim Akhtar was going to her brother Khalid Ahmed. On checking the household effects, some ornaments and Rs.19,000 in cash were found missing.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations indicate that Mst. Shamim Akhtar had gone with co‑accused Rasul Bakhsh of her own. It is further submitted that she has contracted marriage with aforesaid Rasul Bakhsh.

3. I have gone through the relevant material. The allegations in the F.I.R. prima facie show that it was a case of elopement. The petitioner was arrested on 18‑6‑1985, and is in jail since then. During the investigations nothing was recovered from him. In the circumstances, I admit him to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . /Duty Magistrate. Kasur.

4. M.Y.H./A‑363/L Bail granted.