ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No.2805 of 2025

[ Ismail alias Isli son of Manzoor versus The State ]

DATE

ORDER WITH SIGNATUREs OF JUDGEs

 

For hearing of bail application

-----------------------------------------------------

28.01.2026

           

Mr. Shueban Ali Mallah, advocate for applicant

Mr. Muhammad Noonari, D.P.G.

Mr. Rameez Raja, advocate a/w complainant

            -------------------------------------------

 

SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, J.- Applicant/accused Ismail alias Isli son of Manzoor seeks pre-arrest bail in FIR No.726/2024, registered at P.S. Sachal for offence under Sections 376, 342, 34, PPC, after rejection of his bail plea by learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Malir, Karachi vide order dated 27.03.2025.

 

2.         Brief facts of the case are that on 11.05.2023, complainant Mst. Sartaj lodged FIR against the applicant, alleging therein that applicant and his brother Ghulam Rasool kidnaped her along with her daughter, detained them for 25 days at some unknown place and they both committed zina with her, hence subject FIR.

 

3.         Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case; that there is counter version of alleged incident as Mst. Sartaj has contracted marriage with applicant/accused Ismail alias Isli and her ex-husband Yaseen filed application under Section 491, Cr.PC, she was produced before learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Dadu, who recorded her statement in which she deposed that after getting divorce from her first husband Yaseen she contracted marriage with present applicant on 04.08.2023 at Hyderabad and she has not been confined anywhere. In support of his contention, learned counsel for applicant has placed on record photostat copies of Affidavit of Freewill of alleged abductee Mst. Sartaj and other documents and submits that the case of the applicant requires further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC.

 

4.         Learned counsel for complainant has opposed for grant of bail on the ground that alleged abductee has fully implicated the applicant for commission offence in her statement recorded by the concerned Magistrate under section 164, Cr.PC and submits that the alleged offence falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.PC, hence the applicant is not entitled for grant of extra-ordinary relief by way of post arrest bail.

 

5.         Learned D.P.G. has recorded no objection on the ground that this is a case of two version, which requires further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC.

 

6.         Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for complainant, alleged victim Mst. Sartaj as well as learned D.P.G. and perused the material available on record.

 

7.         It is a matter of record that husband of victim lady filed application under Section 491, Cr.PC for recovery of Mst. Sartaj before learned Sessions Judge, Dadu, the same was transferred to Additional Sessions Judge-1, Dadu, the alleged abductee was produced in Court Pument and her statement was recorded by the concerned Court. Perusal of statement reveals that she has contracted marriage with applicant/accused after getting divorce from her first husband Yaseen. However, she deviated from this version and lodged FIR against applicant for offence under Sections 376, 342, 34, PPC. From tentative assessment of material available on record, it appears that this case of two version, which calls for further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC. It is settled proposition of law that merits of case cannot be considered at bail stage as held by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Muhammad Ramzan versus Zafrullah (1986 SCMR 1380) and Muhammad Ijaz versus The State (2022 SCMR 1271). Sufficient grounds are available on record which make the instant case of further inquiry in terms of Section 497(2), Cr.PC. In view of such position, post arrest bail is granted to applicant above named, subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000/- (One hundred thousand) and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

 

8.         Needless to mention here that the observations made hereinabove are tentative in nature, the same would not influence the trial Court while deciding the case of the applicant/accused on merits.

 

9.         Instant criminal bail application is disposed of in the above terms.

 

                                                                                                                        J U D G E

 

Gusher/PS