IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 910 of 2017

Sohaib………….………………...………………...…………………..Applicant

Versus

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

Date of hearing and order : 11.07.2017

Mr. Muhammad Farooq, advocate for applicant

Mr. Ali Haider Saleem, A.P.G.

O R D E R

Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui, J: This order will dispose of the captioned bail application moved on behalf of the applicant Sohaib s/o Mohammed Ishaq, who is involved in a case registered against him at PS Women South vide FIR No. 30/2016 under Sections 365-B, 343, 376 & 34 PPC.

2. The allegations against the applicant are that he along with his friends abducted the complainant (who is a nurse) from a place near to his hostel at JPMC by administering something through her nose and forcibly kept the complainant in his house with his family. During this period, he kept the complainant in confinement in a room and used to commit her rape daily.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the instant application submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that it is alleged by the applicant that she was abducted from nearby her hostel, which is situated inside Jinnah Hospital where Watchmen are available and a rush of people remained there, but no witness of abduction is cited by the complainant nor found during the investigation. According to him, there is a proposal for A-class in final charge-sheet. He draws attention towards the application moved to the SHO in which she complained about maltreatment, but admitted her marriage with the applicant on her own free will. He also draws attention towards the Marriage Certificate (Nikahnama) and photographs of marriage reception in which the complainant is seen as a bride with the applicant as a bridegroom. He submits that the invitation cards were also published for the reception. According to him, the instant case is actually a case of routine domestic and marital dispute, which is being given the colour of criminal proceedings.

4. The learned APG opposes the instant bail application on the ground that the applicant is nominated in the FIR and complainant has fully implicated him. Regarding the proposal of the investigation officer under A-class, he submits that the learned Magistrate has already taken cognizance of the case, as such this sector will not be helpful for the applicant.

5. I have heard the arguments advanced and have gone through the record placed before me. From the record, it is evident that the complainant entered into marital bond with the applicant, and such Nikahnama is annexed with the bail application (page 73 of bail application). The photographs of marriage reception have also been produced an annexed with the bail application (page 79 of bail application). Even the copy of invitation card is also annexed with the bail application showing the names of the complainant as bride and applicant as the bridegroom (page 77 of bail application). The investigation officer has submitted a report suggesting for disposal of the case under A-class (page 49 of bail application). It appears that the complainant after marriage with the applicant became hostile and the hostility might be due to inappropriate treatment of applicants with her. In this position of affairs, a case of the further probe is successfully made out as such the applicant is entitled to be released on 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.

6. It is further observed that if after getting bail, the applicant becomes absconder and remains fugitive to trial after issuance of notice and warrants; then the trial Court will be at liberty to take action against the applicant including the cancellation of bail without making a reference to this Court.

The above are the reasons of my short order dated 11.07.2017.

J U D G E