IMTIAZ alias BADSHAH Versus State
ORDER
KHADIM HUSSAIN TUNIO, J.--- After hearing counsel for the applicants and learned Assistant Prosecutor General. For the reasons to be record later on by short order dated 05-12-2016 I had confirmed interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants in crime No. 47 of 2014 lodged with Police Station Memon Goth under section 364/34, P.P.C. wherein it was alleged that on 26-4-2016 at about 2 p.m. Mst. Seema aged about 16 years and Mst. Sumera aged about 17 years left their house for purchase of grocery articles and they did not come back, on search the complainant learnt that they have been abducted forcefully by Ali Raza, Mashooq Ali, Sajawal, Bilal, Wazeer Ali and Mubeen, took them to unknown place with intention to commit zina and compel them to marry with them against their will.
2. Brief facts of this instant bail applications as unfolded in the FIR are that, on 26th April 2014 at about 2 p.m. Mst. Seema aged about 16 years and Sumera aged about 17 years left home for purchasing grocery articles, but they did not come back therefore, their search was started on own accord and came to know that Ali Raza, Mashooq Ali, Sajawal, Bilawal, Kamran Palari, Wazeer Ali and Mubeen forcefully kidnapped them with intention to commit zina and compelled them for marriage against their will for which FIR was lodged.
3. Mr. Hyder Bux, learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated; that prosecution's story is false and fabricated; that there is unexplained delay of 2 days in the lodging of FIR; that there is no eye-witness of the occurrence in question; that applicants are not nominated as accused, but their names have been disclosed in 164, Cr.P.C. statements by alleged abductees on the instigation and pressure of the complainant; that no such incident had taken place; that it does not appeal to a prudent mind that 6 persons kidnapped two abductees and made them to sit in a small car; that abductees disclosed in their 164, Cr.P.C. statements that eight persons had abducted them; that the nominated accused have been released under section 497, Cr.P.C. by the investigating officer during the course of investigation; that the statement of only one witness namely Zaheer Ahmed has been recorded by IO of the case; that the abductees contracted free will marriages with the applicants namely, Sijawal son of Babu and Ali Raza son of Abdul Ghaffar; that the Nikah Namas had not been verified by the IO during investigation; that the Nikah-khwan has not been examined by the IO; that the case has been challaned, fixed for charge, applicants are attending court regularly and did not misuse the concession of bail, that the supplementary statement of complainant has been recorded on 02.06.2016; that the victims have not been recovered from the possession of the applicants accused; that there are no marks of violence on the bodies of victims; that DNA test has not been conducted, therefore applicants are entitled to concession of pre-arrest bail.
4. Mr. GM Bhutto advocate for applicants Ali Raza and Sajawal argues that the complainant's version has been contradicted by the victims; that abductees disclosed that they were abducted from Memon Goth; that no reasonable explanation in respect to lodging of FIR after 2 days has been given in the FIR; that both the parties are relative, cast fellows and residing in the same village; that on 22.04.2016 abductees Mst. Seema married with Ali Raza and on the same day Mst. Sumera married with Sajawal; that the abductees have given their free will and were recovered on the pressure of the local waderas of the area; that there is delay in recording of 164, Cr.P.C. statements of abductees; that there are general allegations against the applicants and no specific role is assigned to any of the them.
5. In rebuttal of arguments of the learned counsel for applicants/accused, the learned APG has vehemently opposed the bail plea while submitting that the victims have fully implicated the applicants in their 164, Cr.P.C. statements dated 12.05.2016.
6. I embark onto record my reasons for the said order now that the FIR was lodged with an unexplained delay of 2 days; that is no any eye-witness of alleged incident; that the names of applicants accused are not disclosed in the FIR; that their names were disclosed in 164, Cr.P.C. statement by the alleged abductee Mst. Sumera; that the 164, Cr.P.C. statement of the alleged abductees, which according to the applicants were got recorded on the instigation of the complainant Muhammad Waryal father of abductee Mst. Seema and father's cousin of Mst. Sumera.
7. It is obvious from the above position that there is allegation against them of forcibly taking away Mst. Sumera, Mst. Seema and subjecting them to rape. As against the same, applicants; namely, Ali Raza married to Mst. Seema and Sajawal married to Mst. Sumera, raised the plea of their valid Nikahs with the abductees and neither any abduction nor their taking away forcibly or any other act of the type. In support of their plea, they placed on record the Nikah namas. The same show that their marriage with Mst. Sumera and Mst. Seema was solemnized on 22.04.2016. It may also be mentioned here that abductees had also brought suit for dissolution of marriage against the applicants namely Sijawal and Ali Raza before competent family court. According to the learned council for applicants, both these suits are pending adjudication before family court at Malir Karachi bearing F.S No. 679 of 2016 and 680 of 2016. This shows that the question of validity or their Nikahs with abductees is pending before a competent family court. Till any verdict is delivered in respect of the same, I have the least hesitation to say that applicants' case definitely falls within the ambit of further inquiry.
8. In the above noted circumstances interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the applicants accused is hereby confirmed on the same terms and conditions.
JK/I-1/Sindh Bail confirmed.