SAMMON IQBAL SHAH Versus THE STATE
ORDER
Sammon Iqbal Shah has sought bail in a case registered against him and 2 others under section 10/11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 at Police Station City Khanpur, as the Sessions Judge declined to grant him the said relief.
2. Mst. Mumtaz Bibi mother of the abductee and complainant in this case, had migrated to Khanpur from Mandi Heera Singh about 5/6 years before with her family. The petitioner came in search of some job to Khanpur and started living in her house and cultivated illicit connections with the daughter Mst. Kausar Perveen aged 10 years with the help of Mehr Din and Irshad Shah his co‑accused. It so happened that on 5‑3‑1984 Mst. Kausar Parveen went to Govt. Primary School but did not return home. She was told by Muhammad Rafique P.W. that he had seen Mst. Kausar Parveen going in the company of Sammon Shah petitioner, Irshad Shah and Mehr Din his co‑accused towards Railway Station. Mst. Mumtaz Bibi having failed to locate Mst. Kausar Parveen was obliged to report the matter to the police and a case on 9‑3‑1984 was accordingly registered.
3. During the investigation Mst. Kausar Parveen was recovered from Lahore on 17‑4‑1984. She was medically examined. According to Doctor she was not virgin and aged 15/16 years. On 24‑4‑1984 she made a statement before the Magistrate 1st Class under section 164, Cr.P.C. wherein she supported the prosecution. She however, stated that Mehr Din co‑accused of the petitioner is her maternal uncle who helped the petitioner in her abduction. She levelled allegation of rape against the petitioner, who took her from place to place till she was recovered by the police from Lahore. She also stated that her thumb‑impression were obtained by the petitioner on blank paper. In her cross‑examination, she admitted that her two real sisters were prostitutes but denied that Sammon Shah married her to save her from leading sinful life. However, she admitted that she was under great pressure of her mother and her life was in danger.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that Mst. Kausar Parveen is major. She contracted marriage with Sammon Shah of her own free will in order to leave her profession as prostitute and that after she was recovered by the police on 17‑4‑1984, she was coerced and pressurised to make statement against the petitioner for full 7 days and extorted a statement against the petitioner on 23‑4‑1984. He therefore urged that the prosecutrix had made a reference in her statement about the pressure which was brought to bear on her from the side of her mother; lastly he urged that the question whether the petitioner had contracted marriage with the prosecutrix forcibly or not needs further inquiry and as such the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail. As against this learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the petition.
5. Having considered facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the prosecutrix prima facie appears to have reached the age‑of discretion. Seven days after her recovery, she was produced before a Magistrate, wherein she did talk of pressure and danger to, her life from her parents side and, therefore, the plea of the petitioner that the prosecutrix had married him of her own free will with an idea to give up the sinful life as prostitute might be true. In the circumstances, I find that the question as to the guilt or innocence of the petitioner requires further probe and as such he is entitled to' the concession of bail. Consequently this petition is allowed. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A . C . /Duty Magistrate, Rahimyar Khan.
M.Y.H./S‑170/I Bail granted.