Imran Khan vs State S — 2024 YLR 1781 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Imran Khan VS State S.497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.365-B, , 344 , 506 & 34---Government of Gilgit-Baltistan Order, 2018, Art. 75(13)---Kidnapping or abduction, wrongful confinement, criminal intimidation, common intention---Bail, grant of---Extraordinary delay by complainant in approaching police---Contradictory statements of the alleged abductee/victim lady---Record revealed that the matter was reported to the police after about two months and 26-days of taking place of the occurrence and no proper explanation for said extraordinary delay had been furnished by the complainant in the FIR---Copy of Nikah Nama was available on record which showed that the alleged abductee contracted marriage with the petitioner two days after taking place of alleged occurrence---On the very next day of reporting of the occurrence ,the alleged abductee appeared before the Police and got her statement recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C., wherein she contended that she had, out of her own free will , contracted marriage with the petitioner; later on, the alleged abductee appeared before the SHO of concerned Women Police Station wherein she also admitted the factum of her marriage with the petitioner ---Perusal of record also revealed that lady (alleged victim) and her husband (petitioner) filed the suit for declaration etc. before the Civil Court---Although the said suit had been dismissed on account of non-prosecution yet stance taken by her (alleged abductee) in the said suit was that she out of her own free will contracted marriage with petitioner and her father and brothers were causing legal harassment to her and they were interfering with her matrimonial life--- Although the statement of the alleged abductee was again recorded by the police under S.161, Cr.P.C, wherein she changed her initial stance by contending that the petitioner along with co-accused deceitfully abducted her and thereafter the accused persons forcibly obtained her thumb impression on the forged and fictitious Nikah Nama, yet prima facie it seemed that she had given said statement under some undue influence because the alleged abductee in her earlier three consecutive statements had categorically contended that she out of her own free will contracted marriage with petitioner and she did not support the prosecution version, as narrated by the complainant in the FIR---Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, possibility of false involvement of the petitioner in the present case on the basis of mala fides could not be ruled out---Petitioner was behind the bars since his arrest and was no more required by the police for the purpose of further investigation---No useful purpose would be served by keeping the petitioner in jail for an indefinite period---Petitioner was admitted, to post arrest bail.

Imran Khan vs State S — 2024 YLR 1781 Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR