IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 1049 of 2017

Muhammad Tariq Ilyas…….……………………...…………………..Applicant

Versus

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

Date of hearing and order : 18.07.2017

Mr.Yasin Shahid Bhatti, advocate for applicant

Mr.Ehteshamullah Khan, advocate for complainant

Mr.Muntazir Mehdi, DPG

O R D E R

Fahim Ahmed Siddiqui, J: This order will finally dispose of the captioned pre-arrest bail application filed on behalf of the applicant Muhammad Tariq Ilyas against whom, complainant Mst. Lubna lodged a report at PS Al-Falah, Karachi i.e. FIR No. 107/2017 under Section 376, 506-B PPC. Earlier, the applicant succeeded in getting ad-interim pre-arrest bail vide order dated 08-07-2017.

2. The allegations against the applicant are that he is a cleric and in this capacity, he was teaching in Maderssa Jamia Majeedia, where he called the complainant and after seducing her, he committed rape of the complainant.

3. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated by the complainant out of malice and with some ulterior motives. He submits that there is a delay of about nine months, which is not plausibly explained within the body of FIR. He submits that the complainant is playing in the hands of those who are opponent of the applicant and willing to remove the applicant from mosque and madrassa. According to him, the applicant is the founder and chairman of a trust which is the managing body of Masjid Ali Murtaza and Maderssa Jamia Majeedia. He submits that the applicant has constructed masjid and madrassa from his own resources as well as contribution of the public. He submits that there is a rival party, who intend to remove the applicant from the said masjid and madrassa with ulterior motives and they are using complainant for this purpose. He points out that the applicant has already served a legal notice to the complainant and also draws attention towards the reply of the said legal notice. He submits that from the reply of the legal notice it is clear that the complainant has some ulterior motive against the applicant. He also submits that the applicant has filed a trust suit as well as a suit for damages against the complainant. He points out that rape is not alleged in written statements of both the suits, as such the matter requires further enquiry. He submits that the medical examination was conducted after nine months, as such the same is not reliable and it cannot be said with certainty that the applicant is responsible for the loss of virginity of the complainant. He submits that the falsification of the case is established from the fact that no statement under Section 164 CrPC was recorded. According to him, the witnesses of the case are planted witnesses and the same are having a grudge against the applicant. According to him, being a cleric and religious teacher, he needs protection of law. In support of his contention, the learned counsel for the applicant relies upon the following case laws:

i) Tahir alias Tahira v. The State (2001 PCrLJ 123)

ii) Manzoor Ahmed v. The State (PLJ 2008 Cr.C. (Lahore) 1169

iii) Muhammad Jameel and another v. The State and another 2013 PCrLJ 1369.

iv) Rana Muhammad Arshad v. Muhammad Rafique and another (PLD 2009 Supreme Court 427)

4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the complainant opposes the bail application for the applicant mainly on the ground that the applicant is involved in a heinous offence and gravity of the offence is multiplied due to the fact that he is a cleric and remained the leading prayer for a considerable time. According to him, when the masjid committee came to know about the unwholesome activities of the applicant, they removed him from the sacred responsibility of leading the prayer as Imam. He submits that the famous religious personalities like Mufti Naeem of Jamia Binoria, Site, Karachi, Mufti Muhammad Tayyab, Jamia Islamia Imdadia, Faisalabad and others have already given verdicts and the rulings against the applicant. Regarding delay, the contention of the learned counsel for the complainant is that it is common in our society that the girls and their family remain silent after such type of incident only for the sake of their honour and prestige. He submits that the complainant is to be appreciated for her courage and bravery to become complainant against such persons. The learned APG also opposed the instant bail application and briefly his arguments are that the applicant is involved in a heinous offence against the society as such he is not entitled for any concession.

5. I have heard the arguments advanced and have gone through the relevant record placed before me. It is indeed sorrowful that such type of incident took place in a madrassa in which a poor girl is victimised. It is also extremely pitiful that such incidents are increasing in our society. The applicant is apparently a cleric and he used to lead the daily prayers in a mosque and it is also on the record that he was removed from the sacred responsibility on account of certain disparaging activities. It has also come on the record that the renowned Islamic scholars have also shown their disapproving remarks about the applicant. As far as the delay in reporting the incident is concerned, I am of the view that delay is common in our society in the cases of sexual offences especially when the victim is an unmarried girl. It is also revealed from the record that the complainant has earlier reported the incident to some of the persons of the locality, but she could not dare to come forward against the applicant. The applicant being a cleric must have considerable influence in the area, and certainly the same was the reason for non-reporting the incident to the police promptly. The complainant is a young girl of tender age and she is an orphan belonging to a poor family, as such she was easily targeted and victimised by the applicant. I cannot find myself in agreement with the learned counsel for the applicant that the complainant has levelled such allegation against the applicant with mala fide intention and on the instigation of his rival party. It is hard to believe that an unmarried girl will play in the hands of someone for hatching a plot against the applicant by putting at stake her own modesty and reputation.

6. As the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature and the prosecution has collected sufficient material against the applicant, there exists no reason of false involvement of the applicant due to ulterior motive. The complainant is a girl and by levelling false allegation she will gain nothing but lost everything, as such the applicant is not entitled for the extraordinary concession of pre-arrest bail. Resultantly, the instant bail application fails and the order ad interim relief dated 08-07-2017 is recalled.

The above are the reasons for my short order dated 17-07-2017

J U D G E