IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 834 of 2017

Mst. Sonia……………………...………………...…………………..Applicant

Versus

The State…………………………………………..……………….Respondent

Date of hearing and order : 05.07.2017

Mr. Muhammad Faisal Khan, advocate for applicant.

Ms. Rahat Ehsan, A.P.G.

O R D E R

Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui, J: The captioned bail application is filed on behalf of the applicant Mst. Sonia w/o Nadeem, who is involved in a criminal case initiated by the complainant Mohammad Yousuf, who lodged FIR No.122/2017 at PS Sarjani Town under Sections 365-B, 376 & 34 PPC.

2. The allegations against the applicant are that she assisted the co-accused her husband Nadeem and her brother Jehangir in the abduction of the daughter of the complainant, and after the abduction, both the male co-accused committed rape of the said daughter of the complainant.

3. The complainant appeared before this Court and has filed an affidavit of no objection for granting bail to the applicant. The complainant was identified through his CNIC.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that it is hard to believe that a wife will provide assistance to her husband and brother in such type of offence. According to him, the applicant has no role in the alleged incident of rape and even the abduction by her is hardly believable. He submits that the case of the applicant falls under Section 497 (1) CrPC.

5. The learned APG opposes the bail application by submitting that the applicant has provided full assistance to the accused persons as such she is equally responsible for the offence. She submits that at least the offence of abduction is established against her. Regarding affidavit of the complainant, she submits that the accused might have offered some money to him. However, she concedes that being a woman, the proviso of Section 497 CrPC attracts in this case.

6. I have heard the arguments advanced and have gone through the available record. In the instant case, it is really not rational that a woman may provide assistance to her husband and brother for the abduction of a girl with an intention that they might commit rape of her. It appears that the name of the applicant was given by the complainant in a fit of sorrow, rage, and reprisal, which is fortified by the fact that the complainant has filed an affidavit in which he recorded his no objection for the bail of the applicant. The complainant himself appeared before this Court and verified such affidavit, but in the said affidavit he has not said anything about both the male co-accused. The case of the applicant being women falls under the first proviso of Section 497 CrPC.

7. The upshot of the above discussion is that the applicant, being a woman, is entitled to bail, as such she is admitted to bail subject to furnishing surety of Rs.100,000 and PR bond of the equivalent amount up to the entire satisfaction of the trial court.

8. The above are the reasons of my short order dated 05-07-2017

J U D G E