Breaking marriage: Man alleges he was forced to give divorce at gunpoint

He alleged that his in-laws were forcing him to divorce his wife, pay the dowry amount.

Rizwan Shehzad July 11, 2013
He alleged that his in-laws were forcing him to divorce his wife, pay the dowry amount.

KARACHI: A district and sessions court directed the Sharafi Goth police station house officer (SHO) to record the statement of a petitioner and register a case against his in-laws who were accused of forcing him to give a divorce to his wife at gunpoint.

Muhammad Ashraf Mughal had gone to court alleging that his brother in-law, Anees, and his sister in-law, Nazia, along with two other people, had barged into his house and ordered him to give Talaq (divorce) to his wife, Zainab, and pay her the dower amount Rs100,000.

Mughal stated that the men and women beat him up, robbed him of Rs85,000, a mobile phone and other valuables. He added that he had barely managed to save his life after he ran into the street and neighbours intervened.

In his application under section 22-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, Mughal claimed that for the last few months, his wife had been demanding divorce and was even ready to hand over their son’s custody to him if he paid her the dower amount. Zainab, along with her brothers, however, took away their son in his absence, added Mughal.

Following the incident, Mughal claimed that he had gone to the police station but the SHO had refused to register a case against the suspects. Sharafi Goth SHO told the court that the petitioner had submitted a written application but did not turn up at the police station again.

The Malir Court first additional district and sessions judge, Sadaf Asif, directed the SHO Sharafi Goth to record the petitioner’s statement and register an FIR if a cognizable offence was made out of the statement. The judge also ordered to register a case under section 182 of the Pakistan Penal Code against Mughal if the investigations reveal that no such offence had taken place and the petitioner had recorded a false statement.

In addition, the judge directed the investigating officer not to arrest the proposed suspects if no tangible material surfaced apart from the statement of petitioner in the case.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 12th, 2013.