ALI SHER AND 2 OTHERS Versus THE STATE

ORDER

1. This application under section 498, Cr.P.C. has been presented on behalf of applicants Ali Sher, Haji Dargahi and Gado Khan who are facing their trial for offences under sections 366, 368, 109, P.P.C read with section 11 Zina Hudood Ordinance by Cr. Case No. 85/87 lodged at Police Station Rukkun District Dadu on 8th November, 1987 at 21‑10 hours.

2. The prosecution case as per F.I.R. lodged by Lal Din is that on 2‑12‑1987 Mst. Hafizan daughter of Fateh Din was abducted from her village Sita Road Taluka Khairpur Nathan Shah District Dadu by the applicants Ali Sher, Dargahi, Gado and co‑accused Manzoor from the house of one Eris Machi. The age of the girl was given to be 13/14 years and she was stated to be virgin. The F.I.R. was lodged on 8th November, 1987, namely after expiry of seven days of incident. The girl was recovered on 9th November, 1987. She was got medically examined and as per medical certificate her age is 17/18 years. There was no marks of violence on her body and she was used to sexual intercourse. In her 161, Cr.P.C. statement she stated that she was induced to accompany the accused on false pretext.

3. Her 164, Cr.P.C. statement was got recorded on 11th November, 1987 wherein she made certain allegations to the effect that she had gone against her will and was abducted by the accused persons.

4. Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Leghari, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the girl was duly married to the applicant Ali Sher as per Nikahnama dated 8‑11‑1987 and affidavit of the girl dated 7‑11‑1987. He also drew my attention to the authority of the Lahore Court reported in 1986 P Cr. L J at page 1011 wherein it is held that where the age of abductee is 17 years and she is consenting party to elopement and ultimately married the accused as per Nikahnama, it becomes a question of further inquiry as to whether the Nikahnama was forged or not. The facts of the reported case I find, are almost identical to the facts of the case in hand. Mr., Naimatullah Qureshi learned counsel for the State does not oppose the grant of bail particularly in appreciation of the fact that the, medical certificate belied the oral version of the prosecution witnesses inasmuch as the age of the girl as per certificate is 17/18 years there were no marks of violence on her body and she was used to sexual intercourse.

5. I am convinced that the applicants are entitled to be admitted to bail under the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case inasmuch as it appears to be a case of further inquiry into the guilt of the accused applicants. I therefore order that the petitioners be released on bail subject to their furnishing sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000 each and P.R. Bonds in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.

6. M.Y.H./A‑303/K Bail allowed.