2010 PLP 1264 (MLD)

SHAHID HAMEED DAR, J.

This is a post arrest bail application under section 497, Cr.P.C. whereby Muhammad Ibrahim-petitioner has sought his release on bail as he stands involved in case F.I.R. No. 1287 of 2009, dated 6-11-2009 registered under section 365-B, Cr.P.C. registered at Police Station Factory Area, District Lahore on the complaint of Waris Ali.

2. Briefly, the prosecution case, as stated by the complainant is that his wife Mst. Azra Parveen and son Wajid went to a Seminary Mecca Madina, situated at Sitara Colony No.1, Madina Chowk, at 1-30 p.m. on 5-11-2009, to bring Nisha aged 13, daughter of the complainant, where she studied as a student; when they reached near the bridge Bandanwala at about 2-15 p.m., they saw that Mst. Nisha after having been abducted was being taken towards Ferozepur Road in a white colour car bearing no number-plate by the accused Ibrahim alias Baggi, Shahzad alias Billa, Sharifan Bibi, Sidra Bibi and unknown accused person; they raised hue and cry but the said car sped past them; the complainant contacted accused Ibrahim alias Baggi etc. for return of his daughter but they flatly refused. Hence this case.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been falsely involved in this case by the complainant with mala fide intention and ulterior motives; the allegations alleged in the F.I.R. are baseless as Mst. Nisha was already engaged with the petitioner who, after having smelt change of intention of her parents, left her house on her own, and being a sui juris, contracted marriage with the petitioner on 12-1-2008; she had been living with the petitioner as his wife since then; the mother of Mst. Nisha submitted a sworn affidavit in the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Lahore to the effect that her daughter aged 18 had not been abducted by anyone and that she contracted marriage with Ibrahim (petitioner) not only with her own consent but also with the consent of her mother; the alleged abductee recorded her statement under section 200, Cr.P.C. in a private complaint, before the learned Magistrate at Lahore wherein she had denied the story of F.I.R.; that the petitioner has been found innocent during the investigation and his name has been mentioned in column No.2 of the challan.

4. On the other hand, learned Additional Prosecutor-General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R. with an allegation of abduction of the minor daughter of the complainant; the offence committed by the petitioner falls within the ambit of prohibition of section 497, Cr.P.C.; the affidavit submitted by the mother of the abductee may not be considered at this stage as she had joined hands with the accused party.

5. Arguments heard. Record perused. The mother of the alleged abductee Mst. Azra Parveen is present in the Court, who submits that Mst. Nisha was a pubert, aged 18 years and that she had contracted marriage with Ibrahim/accused petitioner, with her free will and accord and that she too had consented to the said marriage and had also participated in it. She has further deposed that the story contained in the F.I.R. No. 1287 of 2009 was false and baseless and that her husband had got lodged this case to blackmail the petitioner and fleece Rs.1,00,000 from him. She had further contended that she had appeared before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore where she had submitted his sworn affidavit in this regard.

6. The prosecution has mainly stressed upon the minority of the abductee with the contention that she was born in 1996 so, she was 14 years of age at the time of the occurrence and being a minor she could not contract marriage with the petitioner. The alleged abductee mentioned her age as 18 years at the time of her marriage with Muhammad Ibrahim-petitioner. She again contended to be of the same age when she filed a private complaint under sections 452, 506, 34, P.P.C. in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Burewala. The mother of the alleged abductee not only mentioned the age of her daughter as 18 years but she endorsed in her affidavit that she was a pubert. A female under the law shall be held to be an adult if she is 16 years of age or has attained the age of puberty, which ever is earlier. There cannot be a better evidence qua the puberty of the alleged abductee, than the statement of her mother, who has categorically stated that her daughter Mst. Nisha be taken as a pubert.

7. The alleged abductee joined investigation and recorded her statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. on 24-11-2009, wherein she refuted the story of F.I.R. in absolute terms and stated that she, after having assessed change in behaviour of her parents, left her house and voluntarily contracted marriage with Ibrahim, accused petitioner, of her free will and accord as she had already been betrothed to him. The mother of the alleged abductee also does not own the prosecution case.

8. The alleged abductee is present in the Court along with her mother and submits that she being a major had contracted marriage with Ibrahim, accused petitioner and that the story alleged in the F.I.R., by her father, was false. The petitioner was found innocent during the course of investigation and his name has been placed in column 2 of the challan. All the attending circumstances of this case constitute need of further inquiry into the guilt of the petitioner as required under section 497(2), Cr.P.C.

9. For what has been discussed above, I accept this application and admit the petitioner to post arrest bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. A.R.K./M-342/L Bail granted.