1992 PLP 2327 (SCMR)

SALEEM AKHTAR, J: ‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to challenge the judgment passed by the Federal Shariat Court whereby the conviction of the petitioner under section 10(3) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 was converted into conviction under section 10(2) of the Ordinance and also conviction under section 11 was converted into conviction under section 16 of the Ordinance and was sentenced to suffer seven years' R.I., 30 stripes of whipping and fine of Rs.10,000, in default to suffer R.I: for one year. Under section 16, he was sentenced to suffer 7 years' R.I., 30 stripes of whipping and fine of Rs.10,000, in default to undergo R.I. for one year. The sentences of imprisonment were to run concurrently. Benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. was also maintained. With this modification, the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed. The case of the prosecution against the petitioner was that on 24‑2‑1990, while Ms. Shabana, the daughter of the complainant Imtiaz Nabi was going to attend her school, the petitioner, who happened to be husband of Gulshan Noorain, the elder sister of Shabana, brought Mst. Shabana allegedly 14 years old to a house at Kemari on the pretext that her mother was seriously ill. The house belonged to, one Ms. Jamila, the step‑sister of the petitioner where he kept Ms. Shabana and `Zina bil‑Jabr' was committed by him for three nights. He thereafter brought her to her parents' house and went away. The Doctor determined the age of Ms. Shabana as 18 years while Dr. Gul‑e‑Rana P.W.4 who examined her on 5‑5‑1990 found her to be not virgin and subjected to sexual intercourse for 5/6 times. The petitioner denied the charge and stated in his statement under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. that the case has been falsely registered at the instance of the complainant due to matrimonial differences between him and his wife. The learned A.S.C. for the petitioner has taken us through evidence and the judgment passed by the learned Courts below and contended that Shabana being a major, has been held to be a consenting party with the petitioner. It was further pointed out that the police did not visit the place where Shabana was subjected to sexual intercourse. It was further contended that no recovery was made from the house at Kemari. The learned counsel also pointed out that the relationship between petitioner and the complainant were strained and there has been a delay of 11 days in filing the F.I.R. We grant leave to re‑appraise the evidence on record for safe administration of criminal justice. The petitioner does not press application for bail. The appeal may be fixed for hearing in the next session. N.H.Q./M‑1676/S Leave granted.