1986 PLP 2910 (MLD)

Javed Aslam Qureshi for Petitioner. Khawaja Muhammad Asghar for the State. Muhammad Ashraf petitioner is accused of the offences under sections 10 and 16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The case was registered against him on 11‑5‑1986 at Police Station Shah Gharib, Tehsil Shakargarh.

2. Mst. Gulzar Bibi was allegedly taken away from the house of her husband by the wife of her husband's elder brother namely Mst. Sabiran. She kept her in her own house when Aslam petitioner allegedly raped her. She lived there for some days, later Mst. Sabiran took her to the house of the petitioner and kept her there after she had been paid Rs.500. Mst. Gulzar was alleged to have been kept by Muhammad Ashraf in his house where his father also lived with them. It is further alleged that on the arrest of Ashraf, petitioner and his father Mst. Gulzar managed to escape and went to her parents.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the case was foisted against the petitioner because of his enmity with the local Chairman against whom a case of attempt of rape of petitioner's sister was registered about six months before the arrest occurrence in this case. It was further contended that in order to pressurise and to effect a compromise in the said case, the Chairman managed to put up the present case against the petitioner and that the Chairman has been successful. Hence Mst. Nusrat petitioner sister is allegedly persuaded to make a statement in favour of the said Chairman. Although, the challan in this case should have been submitted earlier but the same is being delayed to achieve the desired results in the case against the Chairman.

4. I have considered the matter. Though, learned counsel far the petitioner has not been able to show any connection of the prosecutrix or her husband with the Chairman, however, without prejudice to the case of either side, prima facie the narration in the F .I. R. and the statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. show that in all probability it was a case of elopement because it appears to be highly improbable that petitioner's., father would allow him to keep an abducted woman for rape in his house. It was also improbable that Mst. Sabiran would take away her own sister‑in‑law for rape. Another material circumstance appearing in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. is that she managed to escape and went to her parents when the police arrested the petitioner and his father. Normally she should have appeared before the police then and there and made a statement and gone to her husband. In the end it may also be added here that Mst. Gulzar prosecutrix is alleged to have given birth to six children. She would under the circumstances in all probability be more than 20 years of age. For these reasons, petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.5,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . /Duty Magistrate Shakargarh. S.A.???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail allowed.