October 16, 2008	Thursday	Shawwal 16, 1429

HYDERABAD, Oct 15: The Sindh High Court, Hyderabad circuit bench, on Wednesday stayed operation of an FIR against a newly-wed couple by directing Naukot police that no person should be arrested in the case.

The court directed the Sindh assistant attorney-general to provide protection to couple so that they may be able to appear before court on October 22.

The court also ordered that protection should be given to them for their safe travelling as well as their arrival at their destination. The order was passed on a petition, filed by Naeem Talpur advocate on behalf of Mohammad Hayat and his wife Ms Khani, residents of Kot Ghulam Mohammad, Mirpurkhas.

After petitioner’s counsel informed the court that court premises are cordoned off by the police, the bench comprising Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Dr Rana M. Shamim directed court’s additional registrar to inform concerned police and private persons not to cause any harassment or arrest of petitioners.

Petitioners were present in the court and the woman said that she was married to the petitioner. The copy of her nikahnama was also presented before the court. She denied that she was kidnapped and said that she had married Hayat of her own free will.

The court issued notices to DO, SP investigations and SHO of Mirpurkhas and AAG Sindh for October 22.

Ms Khani said that her father was forcing her to marry an old man of questionable character only for monetary consideration against her will.

She said that she left her parents’ house and along with Hayat appeared before the civil judge and judicial magistrate of Samaro where they got married on October 10.

Her father lodged a case under section 365-B, 452 and 34 PPC at police station Naukot against her husband and others.

Petitioners’ counsel said that the FIR was false as Ms.Khani was a sui juris. He said that after registration of FIR they have left their house and were feeling insecure.

He prayed the court to quash FIR 61/08 and direct DPO Mirpurkhas to provide protection to petitioners. He said that respondents should be restrained from harassing petitioners.