KARACHI: A sessions court has dismissed the bail application of a man booked on charges of disappearance of evidence in a case pertaining to alleged marital rape.

The suspect, Viko Maheshwari, is a relative of the prime suspect who was held for allegedly torturing and sexually assaulting his 19-year-old wife, who later died after remaining in a coma for over two weeks.

Viko had filed an application before Additional District and Sessions Judge (South) Abdul Zahoor Chandio and sought post-arrest bail, while the complainant side had filed no objection to the application.

After hearing the state prosecutor, Irfana Qadri, who opposed the bail plea, and the defence counsel, the court dismissed the plea, observing that the “overwhelming gravity of the offences, the prima facie evidence connecting the applicant/accused to the crime of screening the offender, and the dubious nature of the no-objection affidavit.”

“These are amongst the most serious offences in penal jurisprudence, involving the brutal termination of a human life and a profound violation of personal dignity. The allegations depict a chilling narrative of spousal violence, sexual assault and a concerted effort to suppress the truth,” the judge observed.

Regarding the defence counsel’s argument that the suspect’s name was not mentioned in the FIR, the court noted: “No doubt, the applicant/accused’s name is not in the FIR, but the subsequent investigation has evidently uncovered his alleged role in the aftermath of the crime. The law is well settled that omission of a name in the FIR is not fatal to the prosecution’s case if credible evidence is later discovered.”

“The applicant/accused’s presence at the hospital is not, as claimed, a marker of innocence but is rather a circumstance that forms part of the sequence of events as alleged by the prosecution, namely, his participation in the initial attempt to conceal the true cause of the victim’s death. The core of the matter lies in the nature and gravity of the offences alleged. The charges include those under Sections 302 (murder), 376-B (rape), and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) PPC,” it added.

The court also found a discrepancy in the affidavit filed by the complainant side in support of granting bail to the applicant.

“This inconsistency raises serious doubts about the authenticity and voluntariness of the affidavit of no objection. In the context of such a serious crime, which is an offence against the state, the wishes of a private complainant, especially when documented under questionable circumstances, cannot override the demands of justice and the need for a thorough investigation and trial.”

During the arguments, prosecutor Qadri contended before the court that the applicant, along with others, had allegedly signed an affidavit undertaking not to report the incident to the police, which is available on record and indicates his involvement in the matter. She further argued that the affidavit filed by the complainant carried no evidentiary value in such a case, where a newly-wed girl was brutally sexually assaulted by her husband, resulting in her death.

Published in Dawn, September 3rd, 2025