Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No.480/B of 1987, decided on 8th April, 1987.

---S.497(5)--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VIII of 1979;, S.10--Bail, cancellation of--Accused claiming to have married co-accused after she was divorced from complainant--No divorce deed produced--Witnesses to such divorce deed denying any knowledge- Brother and mother of female accused swearing affidavits denying complainant having ever divorced accused--Suit for restitution of conjugal rights compromised on statement of female accused being ready to live as wife of complainant--Bail cancelled in circumstances.

Syed Laqa Haider Zaidi for Petitioner.

Muhammad Fazal Naul for Respondents Nos.l anti 4.

Sardar Muhammad Khurshid for the State.

Date of hearing: 8th April, 1987.

Ahmad Khan petitioner has moved this petition for cancellation of bail allowed to Ghulam Abbas, Khadim Hussain, Sakina Bibi and Mst. Zohran Bibi respondents by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhang vide order dated 8-1-1986. Mst. Zohran Bibi was allowed bail after arrest and the remaining respondents were granted bail before arrest. The prayer with regard to Khadim Hussain and Sakina Bibi was declined at the preliminary hearing. Notice was issued only to Ghulam Abbas and Mst. Zohran Bibi respondents.

2. The prosecution version is that Mst. Zohran Bibi wife of Ahmad Khan complainant developed illicit relations with Ghulam Abbas respondent. Six months prior to the registration of the case Mst. Sakiria Bibi respondent took her away on the pretext of answering the call of nature. She did not return and the complainant was informed by Ghazi and Lal that they had seen Mst. Zohran Bibi going with Ghulam Abbas respondent on a mare alongwith Khadim Hussain and Sakina Bibi who were on another mare. He requested the relatives of Ghulam Abbas for restoration of Mst. , Zohran Bibi but to no avail and ultimately he reported the occurrence on 3-12-1985.

3. The plea taken by the respondents in the Sessions Court was that Mst. Zohran Bibi was divorced by Ahmad Khan complainant on 26-12-1984 through a divorce deed and after completing the period of Iddat, she contracted marriage with Ghulam Abbas respondent. On behalf of the complainant, it was contended that in a suit for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the complainant Mst. Zohran made a statement in the Family Court on 21-4-1985 that she had gone over to her husband Ahmad Khan and in view of that statement the said suit was dismissed on the basis of compromise. It was submitted that Mst. Zohran on her own showing was the wife of Ahmad complainant on 21-4-1985, therefore, the question of any divorce on 26-12-1984 did not arise.

The reasons which weighed with the learned Sessions Judge for granting bail were that the thumb-impressions of Ahmad Khan were not got compared with the thumb-impression on the disputed divorce deed and the question whether Mst. Zohran had been divorced or not was open for further inquiry. The learned Sessions Judge further observed that the statement recorded on 21-4-1985 in the suit for restitution of conjugal rights appeared to be collusive one as the possibility of some other woman having been produced in Court to make that statement could not be ruled out.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that observation with regard to the statement dated 21-4-1985 is conjectural: Mst. Zohran never produced any divorce deed either in Court or before the investigating officer, therefore, the question of comparison of the thumb-impressions did not arise at all. It is submitted that it is a case of great high handedness as both the respondents are openly living in adultery. The learned State counsel has also supported the petitioner.

5. The learned counsel for the respondents has made the same submissions as were urged before the learned Sessions Judge. He is not in a position to explain as to where the original divorce deed is. He has shown me a photocopy of divorce deed on which Gul Muhammad and Mumtaz son of Waryam appeared as witnesses. Both of them have sworn affidavits to the effect that they have no knowledge of the divorce nor had ever thumb marked any divorce deed. Karam and Ghulam Fatima, the real brother and mother of Mst. Zohran, have also sworn affidavits that Ahmad Khan never divorced her. There is no material on the record to show that some other woman was produce to make statement in the suit for restitution of conjugal rights on 21-4-1985. In the circumstances, it was not a fit case for the grant of bail to the respondents. Consequently the bail allowed by the learned Sessions Judge to Ghulam Abbas and Mst. Zohran is cancelled. They shall be taken into custody forthwith.

S. A.,/A-104/L Bail cancelled.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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