1. ' This is an application for bail on behalf of the accused Ali Akbar against whom F.I.R. No,259/94 was registered by Gohar Sarfraz at Police Station Zaman Town on 7-9-1994. This report was registered as a result of a written complaint, which was addressed by complainant Gohar Sarfraz on 31-7- 1994 to the Inspector-General of Police Sindh, Karachi. In this application/complaint Gohar Sarfraz has stated that in the month of July, 1994 his younger sister and other family members had come to visit him at Karachi from Sialkot. Among them was his younger sister Mst. Faiza aged about 15 years, who had gone to Market alongwith the wife and maid servant of the complainant. Gohar Sarfraz went on to complain that on the way back from the market accused Akbar Ali and his sisters Fatima and Shazia took away his wife, his maid servant and his sister Faiza forcibly against their consent to some unknown place, took their photographs, prepared a video film and got some papers signed from his sister Mst. Faiza on issuing threats of severe consequences. It was also disclosed in the written complaint by Mr. Gohar Sarfraz that accused Akbar Ali after getting the signature of Mst. Faiza on the papers had informed that these were the marriage papers and that he will come to claim the hand of Mst. Faiza after one year. The complainant stated that since Mst.
2. Faiza was a minor and there was no consent, therefore, all this was done in order to blackmail them. The complainant, therefore, requested for action. The police, as a result of this application on the directions of the Inspector-General of Police Sindh, registered the F.I.R. For an offence under section 11 of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and arrested the applicant. The applicant moved an application for bail in the trial Court, which has been rejected by the Court of Sessions Judge, Karachi (East) on 20-9-1994. Thereafter, the present application has been filed.
3. ' I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant Mr. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, Mr. Ziauddin Nasir, learned counsel for the complainant and Mr. Ameer Hani, A.A.-G. For the State, who has opposed the grant of bail to the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that the Investigating Officer in this case was one Mr. Asif Jah, who was cousin of the complainant Gohar Sarfraz Qureshi and that the police was biased against the applicant and that the investigation was not. Fair and it was one-sided. Mr. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, in support of his contentions for the grant of bail, argued that there is inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R., which is not explained.
4. Besides, he has relied upon the fact that Mst. Faiza had sworn an affidavit before a Magistrate First Class at Karachi, in which she stated that she had exercised her choice and free will to marry with Ali Akbar as her parents wanted to marry her with a person not liked by her. Apart from this affidavit, a Nikahnama has also been produced. In addition, learned counsel produced in Court color photographs showing Mst. Faiza in various stages of the Nikah in company of applicant Ali Akbar and many other persons. Beside, this, there are three letters purporting to have been written by Mst. Faiza which also show that she has exercised the right of her free-will in signing the Nikahnama and the affidavit that she has married with Ali Akbar of her own free-will. On the other hand the learned counsel for the complainant has relied upon a certificate of birth produced before the Investigating Officer, which shows the date of Mst. Faiza to be 1-2-1980, as a result of which Mst. Faiza is claimed to be of 14-1/2 years of age and according to the learned counsel for the applicant that consent was of no consequence as Mst. Faiza was minor and that in her 164, Cr.P.C. Statement she has stated that she was forcibly abducted when she was returning alongwith the wife of the complainant and her maid servant, from the market at about 4-00 p.m. On 7-7- 1994. She stated in her 164, Cr.P.C. Statement that applicant Ali 'Akbar was in a car which stopped by their side. Ali Akbar was armed with a pistol while two other unknown persons who were in the second car, which had also stopped there, were having pistols. She along with the wife of the complainant and the maid servant, were abducted on the show of the weapons. She was taken to a bungalow where she was asked to sign some papers, she was maltreated and she stated that her thumb-mark was obtained on some papers and some register and that her photos were also taken and thereafter all of them were released. She was also threatened not to disclose this incident for one year and that in case the parents of Mst. Faiza were not willing to perform the Nikah of Mst. Faiza with the applicant they will be blackmailed. Mst. Faiza further disclosed that she did not disclose this to her brother at Karachi and when she went to Sialkot there she disclosed this story. In her statement under section 164 she did not claim that she was raped or any sexual intercourse took place. Considering the fact that the copy of the Nikahnama was produced in Court bearing the signature of Mst. Faiza in English and not her thumb-mark and that no attempt to commit rape on any of the ladies was made, the story of the prosecution needs some further enquiry to find out the truth. The affidavit bears a thumb-mark, the signature on the Nikahnama and the signatures on 164, Cr.P.C. Statement of Mst. Faiza are in English and to the naked eye do not appear to be at much variance. In the case reported in PLD 1987 SC 5 (Shariat Appellate Court), it has been held that for being adult for a girl, her attaining the age of 18 years is not necessary and that the word "adult" has not been defined in the Act No,VII of 1979 and that the word "puberty" should be taken to mean adult. Under these circumstances, at this stage, I consider that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. The application for bail is, therefore, allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) to the satisfaction of the trial Court and P.R. Bond in the like amount.