2009 PLP 112 (YLR)

SALMAN ANSARI, J.

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the applicant Tariq Shah. A bail application was rejected by the learned Vth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Karachi (Central) on 31-7-2008 and by the same order co-accused Mst. Razia was granted bail. Hence this bail application. Brief facts of the case are that one Mst. Muzafar Bano mother of abductee lodged. an F.I.R. at New Karachi Town Police Station on 10-3-2008, stating therein that her daughter Sana who was married to one Imran had telephoned her on 24-11-2007 when she was coming to the complainant's house, but thereafter she received no further intimation of the whereabouts of her daughter and she lodged this F.I.R. and a case under section 365-B/34, P.P.C. was lodged against the accused persons named in the F.I.R. namely Razia, Nazir, Yamin and Fayyaz. Thereafter the police recovered alleged abductee Sana at Lahore on 14-6-2008 while she was standing at a bus stop alongwith accused Razia and applicant Tariq Shah. The 164, Cr.P.C. statement of the girl was recorded before the Vth Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate Karachi (Central) on 9-7-2008. On 20-6-2008 the abductee was medically examined at the Abbasi Shaheed Hospital, Nazimabad, Karachi and no marks of violence were found and she was found not virgo-intacta. The report on the vaginal slide made for the chemical analysis has not yet been received. Learned counsel for the applicant/accused Tariq Shah has argued that though the main accused is shown Mst. Razia but she was released on bail only on the ground that she being a woman and the alleged role of the applicant/accused Tariq Shah is only minimal compared to with of Mst. Razia. The 164, Cr.P.C. statement of Sana shows that she had not contacted her mother on 24-3-2008. In 164, Cr.P.C. statement she has stated that the accused Tariq Shah and Mst. Razia were already in custody when was taken to Police Station at Lahore, which belies the police version that she was recovered on 24-6-2008 standing at a bus stop along with Tariq Shah and Razia. That there are contradictions in the statement of the alleged victim and the medical report which has been conducted after six days of her recovery, hence has placed reliance upon Muhammad Siddique v. The State 1985 PCr.LJ 658 (Lahore), wherein it was held that the prosecutrix being a married woman medically examined 3 days after alleged outrage having no mark of violence, bail was allowed under the circumstances. In 1987 PCr.LJ. 512 (Lahore) Liaquat Ali v. The State it was held that except prosecution's solitary statement no evidence of rape produced against petitioner, bail was allowed. That the case of the accused being one of bail, he may be released accordingly. The learned State Counsel has opposed the bail application on the ground that the accused have kidnapped a married woman and the offence under section 365-B P.P.C. is punishable with imprisonment for life. Having heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant/accused and the learned State counsel. In this case it has been admitted in the bail application filed on behalf of the accused Tariq Shah, in para. 6 that the abductee Sana had posed herself as a virgin and sworn affidavit and then solemnized marriage with the applicant/accused and fixed her thumb impression as well as signature on the Nikahnama. This admission is also supported by the copies of documents filed and the Nikahnama which shows that abductee was married to three different persons and she was not in the company of her parents and she had left the house of her husband Imran after a domestic quarrel. In my opinion with due respect to the case-law cited by the learned counsel for the applicant/accused and his argument, where there is admission of Nikah with an already married woman, bail should not be granted at this stage, the lower Court is however directed to examine the abductee without any delay, thereafter applicant/ accused case can be considered for bail. H.B.T./T-12/K Bail refused.