| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 3037 1970 SLD 3037 = 1970 PCRLJ 166 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 559 of 1968, decided on 20th January 1969.
Presented By: Ataullah Sajjad, J
M. Ismail Bhatti for Appellants. Mufti Nasar Muhammad for A.-G. for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 559 of 1968, decided on 20th January 1969.
Presented By: Ataullah Sajjad, J
M. Ismail Bhatti for Appellants. Mufti Nasar Muhammad for A.-G. for the State.
KHADIM AND 16 OTHERS-Petitioners
VERSUS
, THE STATE-Respondent
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 344, 346, 365, 366, 376
(a) Muhammadan Law-Marriage-Option of puberty -Girl married in childhood repudiating marriage before consummation and while still under 18 years-Matrimonial relationship between husband and wife, held, automatically severed on exercise of option of puberty and no civil Court decree necessary to give same legal force. In the present case, there was no consummation of marriage and the girl had exercised the option of puberty by repudiating the marriage. Her age at the maximum was estimated to be 151 years. She could under the law exercise the option of puberty up to the age of eighteen years. According to the Muslim Law, there is an automatic severance of the matrimonial relationship when the girl exercises the option of puberty. It is not necessary that in order to give legal force to the repudiation of marriage a decree should be obtained from a civil Court. Muhammad Bakhsh v. Crown and others P L D 1950 Lah. 203; Mst. Munni v. Habib Khan P L D 1956 Lah. 403 and Mofeezud Din v. Rahman BIN A I R 1934 Cal. 104 rel. Nura v. The State P L .D 1960 Lah. 53 d1stinguished. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 344, 346, 365, 366 & 376 Abduction-Wrongful confinement-Wife having lawfully repudiated marriage in exercise, of her option of puberty forcibly lifted by accused (former husband) accompanied by many others and secretly kept in wrongful confinement for more than ten days-Intention of accused Inferable from circumstances, to compel girl to have Inter course at least with former husband (accused)-Conviction under S. 366, P. P. C. sustainable-Forcible and secret detention of girl for over ten days, even otherwise, sufficient to warrant conviction under S. 365 or 344 read with S. 346, P. P. C. The marriage in this case stood dissolved as soon as the girl exercised the option of puberty or at least on the day when the suit was instituted which was certainly before the date of occur rence. If it is proved from the evidence that the girl was forcibly lifted, the clear intention that can be inferred from: this act is that this was in order to compel her to have intercourse at least with her former husband to whom she had been married in her child hood. Even if the…