5, April 2005	Tuesday	25 Safar 1426

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

PESHAWAR, April 4: The Federal Shariat Court set aside on Monday conviction of a woman by a Qazi court and acquitted her in a case of contracting second marriage while she was still wedded to her first husband. A single judge bench of Justice S.A.Manan accepted a Shariat appeal filed by the appellant observing that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against her.

The court observed that the evidence on record could not prove that the woman had earlier contracted ‘nikkah’ and in the presence of that nikkah she had married another person.

The appellant was convicted by the Zila Qazi in Swat on Sept 23, 2002, and was sentenced to three-year imprisonment with a fine of Rs10,000. The trial court had acquitted the co-accused, the husband of the woman. She was convicted under section 494 of the Pakistan Penal Code.

The woman, having two children from the wedlock, was having her eight-month-old baby with her in the courtroom. She stated that she had no previous nikkah before her present marriage.

Deputy Advocate-General Mohammad Ayaz Khan conceded that there was no proper evidence on record to prove the alleged first nikkah of the appellant. He added that even if that nikkah was proved the appellant was only 13 at that time and was not an adult.

The appellant counsel, Abdul Lateef Afridi, contended that the trial court had convicted the woman and acquitted her husband which created doubts about the entire case. He added that against her will her parents had engaged her to a person and no nikkah was contracted. He argued that she disagreed with that engagement and contracted nikkah with her present husband in 2000, when she was 16. He added that there was no documentary evidence to prove her previous nikkah.

Moreover, Mr Afridi contended that section 494, dealing with contracting second marriage during lifetime of husband or wife, was a compoundable offence.

He added that the complainant in the case was the father of the appellant and he had also entered into compromise with her.

The father of the appellant, present in the courtroom, stated that he had no objection over the acquittal and he had some misunderstanding on the basis of which the FIR was registered.

The bench observed that when the co-accused was acquitted there was no justification in convicting the woman.