IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 548 of 2017

 

Amir Baloch……………………...………………...…………………..Applicant

 

Versus

 

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

 

Date of hearing and order :     06.07.2017

Mr. Irshad Ali Shar, Advocate for applicant

Mr. Qadir Hussain Khan, Advocate for complainant

Ms. Rahat Ehsan, A.P.G.

 

O R D E R

           

Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui, J: This order will dispose of the instant bail application through which the applicant Amir Baloch son of Baloch Ali Gul Khan is seeking his release on bail during trial under Section 497 Cr.P.C in a case initiated against him under FIR No. 237/2016 of Police Station Khwaja Ajmer Nagri, under Section 292, 324, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-F(v), 337-F(vi), 337-L(ii), 342, 504, 509 PPC.

 

2.    Heard arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned APG and perused the record under their valued assistance. From whatever argued and placed before me, I have observed as under:

a)    The allegations against the applicant are that he had confined complainant Mst. Asma Aamir (wife of applicant) in his house and used to torture her physically, sexually and mentally since the last couple of years. The complainant was rescued by an NGO and it is reported that she was recovered tied in ropes. After recovery, she reported that the complainant sexually abused her and tortured her by burning her private parts, he had cut her heels and eyebrows and tied her in ropes etc.

b)    The prosecution allegations are serious in nature and it will not improve the case of the applicant that the complainant is still his wife. A wife is not the property of her husband and he had no right to abuse her, torture her or even to disgrace her openly or privately.

c)    The confinement of a woman and restrained her by tying her with ropes, sexually and physically abusing her is a serious offence and it is more than the domestic torture. The allegations of administering drugs and burning her private parts attract provision of Section 324 PPC.

d)    The contention of the complainant has not only come on the record through the contents of FIR but she has already recorded her statement under Section 164 CrPC in which she has supported the contents of FIR and described the entire atrocities caused to her by the applicant.

e)    It has also come on the record that the complainant has first contacted with her neighbour and under his assistance, the NGO’s headed by Mr Sarim Barni rescued the complainant. Such statement of neighbour is also on the record, which verifies the contention of the complainant regarding atrocities and maltreatment through which she has undergone.

f)     The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the complainant was not sent for medical examination, as the name of medico legal officer is not mentioned in the calendar of witnesses. It appears from the record that the complainant was sent for medico legal examination and non-availability of the name of medical officer in Final Report will not improve the case of applicant in this respect. The prosecution is very much competent to call the medical officer during trial and even the court may direct him to appear for examination.

g)    It is reflected from the record that after submission of Final Report, the applicant was released on bail by the concerned Judicial Magistrate. The complainant filed the CP No. D-7139/2016 before this Court and under the direction in the said CP, the investigation was entrusted to SSP investigation Faizullah Korejo and during the investigation considerable material collected and Section 324 PPC was added due to which the earlier bail order was recalled by the concerned Judicial Magistrate.

h)   Being a woman, the complainant deserves to be treated with the delicacy, respect and gracefulness and her such rights were violated. Being husband, it is the responsibility of applicant to take care of and protect the complainant in which he is not only badly failed but in fact he is responsible for all those traumas, pains and sufferings, she passed through.

 

3.    It is my tentative view that there is sufficient material available on record to implicate the applicant with the commissioning of heinous offence and such type of serious domestic tortures are rampant in the society. In the instant matter, prima facie no case of further investigation within the meaning of section 497 (2) has been made out for the grant of bail. Accordingly the bail application was dismissed vide short order dated 03.5.2017 and these are the reasons for short order. However, the trial court is directed to pace up the trial and take every possible efforts to conclude the trial within the shortest possible time preferably within a span of three months.

 

4.    I would like to make it clear that the above observations are purely tentative in nature, and the same are only meant for the purpose of bail and would have no impact or effect on any party during the trial.

 

 

 

                                                                                                            J U D G E