IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

 

1st Criminal Bail No.S-116  of 2025

 

(Shahban Ali and Muhammad Bakar v/s. The State)

 

 

DATE

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

 

Before:    

Mr. Justice Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro

 

1.     For orders on office objections at flag "A".

2.     For hearing of Bail Application.

 

Applicants:                 1. Shahban Ali son of Koral Khero

2. Muhammad Bakar son of Shahban Ali Khero

Through Mr. Ukesh Kumar, Advocate.

 

Complainant:              Mumtaz Ali son of Bahawal Khan Brohi

                                    Through Mr. Jam Zuhaib Ahmed, Advocate.

 

State:                           Through Ms. Rubeena Dhamrah, Assistant Prosecutor General,

Sindh.    

 

Date of Hearing:         26.05.2025

 

Date of Decision:       26.05.2025

 

O R D E R

 

Nisar Ahmed Bhanbhro, J.-  Through this application, Applicants Shahban Ali and Muhammad Bakar seek post-arrest bail in Crime No.66/2024, registered under sections 364-A, 376, 34 P.P.C of Police Station Rehmatpur. Earlier the applicants filed bail application for the same relief, but same was dismissed by Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Larkana vide order dated 05.12. 2024. Hence this bail application.

2.         The facts in brief as per case of the prosecution are that on 14.06.2024 complainant Mumtaz Ali Brohi lodged F.I.R., alleging therein that his daughter Shumaila, aged about 13 years was studying in Class-VII in Paigam Public School, Bhains Colony, Larkana. She left home on 13.06.2024 at about 11:00 a.m. for appearing in the examination. The complainant soon after departure of Dua heard cries of his daughter, he, alongwith his brother-in-law Hussain Bux came outside the house and identified accused Shoaib son of Dil Murad Brohi and Muhammad Ali, both residents of Larkana and two unidentified accused persons abducted her daughter with intention to commit zinna with her.  Later the alleged abductee was recovered on 05.08.2024 and on 06.08.2024 she appeared before the learned Magistrate, where she stated that on 13.06.2024 when she came out of the house at about 11:00 a.m. accused namely Shahban and Naimat Langah abducted her and confined her at unknown place; where accused Shahban Khero committed zinna and after four days accused Sabir also committed Zinna with her and accused Shahban used to intoxicate her, whereafter accused Bakar also came to Karachi, who used to commit zinna with her; then the accused persons brought her to Larkana, where Waqar was also present and they pressurized her to solemnize marriage with Sabir Samon; the accused also robbed gold tops, mobile phone from her and sold it out.  On the basis of 164 Cr.P.C. Statement, sections 365-B, 376 and 506/2 P.P.C were added in the charge sheet and the report was submitted before the trial Court.

3.         Learned Counsel for Accused contends that the names of the applicants/accused are not mentioned in the F.I.R. so also in 161 Cr.P.C. statement of the witnesses recorded on 14.06.2024. The names of the applicants/accused were mentioned in the charge sheet on the basis of Statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded by the victim and the further statement of the complainant and other witnesses. The victim was produced before M.L.O, wherein it was opined that no fresh sign of rape was observed on her body; however, two fingers were easily admitted and hymen was torn. He contended that the case against the applicants/accused is false and they have been roped on account of previous hostility. The victim had herself released video, alleged some other persons for marriage. He prayed that the applicants/accused may be enlarged on bail.

4.         Learned Assistant Prosecutor General, Sindh assisted by learned counsel for the complainant contends that the victim has specifically nominated accused for committing zinna with her and as per medical report, it has been confirmed that she was subjected to Zinna. The victim is 13 years old and her entire life has been ruined due to abhorrent act of the accused persons. The offence alleged carries capital punishment and case has been challaned after investigation and sufficient material was collected to connect the applicants/accused with commission of crime. They, therefore, vehemently opposed the grant of bail.

5.         Heard learned counsel for parties and perused the material available on record.  No doubt the F.I.R. was registered by the complainant, alleging that the minor girl was abducted by one Shoaib Brohi and others, but after recovery of the victim/abductee the entire scenario in the crime changed, wherein she specifically alleged that present applicants/accused abducted her from outside her house and she was subjected to zinna by all the accused persons by confining her in Karachi. Since the victim has specifically nominated the applicants and the medical report also opined that she has been subjected to zinna many a times; that the offence alleged carries capital punishment and it is the offence against society where a minor baby was abducted subjected to zinna and her entire life was ruined; as such sufficient material is available on record to connect the applicants/accused with commission of offence.  No ill-will or malafide has been pointed out by the applicants for their false implication in this case.  Learned counsel for the applicants has failed to make out the case for grant of bail in view of sub-section (2) of Section 497 Cr.P.C. The offence alleged is serious and heinous in nature, it relates to the safety and security of school going minor girls. The Applicants could not point out any hostility of victim against them, who shall sacrifice her modesty, honour by leveling such allegations.

6.         The offence alleged falls within the prohibitory clause of section 497 Cr.P.C. and grant of bail in such like cases could amount to grant the open licenses to play with the lives and future of innocent girls.

7.         For what has been discussed hereinabove, the tentative assessment of material on record connects the accused with commission of crime and no case for grant of bail as envisaged under section 497 Cr.P.C is made out. Consequently, bail application is dismissed.

8.         Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature and would not influence the learned Trial Court while deciding the case of either party at trial.

                        Bail application stands disposed of accordingly.

Judge

 

Manzoor