Find a Lawyer

Criminal

Miscellaneous No. 896/11 of 1980, decided on 5th April 1980.

(a) offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)-

-- S. I1 read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 497-Bail, grant of'-Offence of abduction under S. 11 of Hudood Ordinance, scope of-Girl allegedly a little over 15 years at time of abduction and marriage-Such marriage being only irregular, provision of S. 11 of Hudood Ordinance, held, not applicable-Question of age of alleged abductee, however, yet to be determined by trial Court and girl prima facie appearing to have attained puberty-Petitioners allowed bail, in circumstances.

Shaukat Haroon for Petitioner. Nemo for the State.

Ghulam Murtaza for the Complainant, ,

An F. 1. R. No. 49/80 was registered at the instance of one Muhammad Bashir son of Barkat Ali on 11.3-80 at 4-30 p.m. at Police Station Satellite Town, Gujranwala. In the F. I. R. the petitioners are accused of abduction and offence under section 11 of Ordinance VI1 of 1979.

2. Interim bail was allowed to the petitioner by me on 17-3-80. Argu ments of the parties have been heard.

3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Bushra Bibi alias Rani has married Boota petitioner of her own free-will. She was neither abducted nor forced to marry Boota petitioner. It is also stated that according to the medical certificate, Mst. Bushra in opined to be of 16/1.7 years of age.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant on the other hand has opposed the confirmation of bail, firstly, on the ground that names of the accused persons are fully detailed in the F. I. R. and secondly, the petitioners after the grant of interim bail have not joined the investigation. According to the learned counsel, Mst. Bushra Bibi is not of full age as, according to him, she is below sixteen years, and, therefore, the marriage contracted by her is irregular.

5. The contentions raised by the learned counsel for the complainant have no force. Merely because names of the petitioners appear in the F. I. R. is not sufficient to disallow bail to them. Mst. Bushra has been examined by the investigating Officer, in which she has stated to have married Boota petitioner of her own free-will and that she was not abducted by any person. According to the Police Officer, the date of birth of Mst. Bushra is 20-12-64 and she was about 15 years 2 months at the time of occurrence. The con tention of the learned counsel for the complainant that the marriage of Boo petitioner with Mst. Bushra is irregular, is sufficient to grant bail to th petitioners because the offence under section 11 of Ordinance VII of 1979, prima facie, is not applicable if the marriage is irregular. It is only in case of void marriage that the provisions of the Ordinance are attracted. The question of age is yet to be determined by the trial Court. Prima acie Mst. Bushra alias

Rani seems to have attained puberty and this is also con firmed from her outward appearance.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.