NASIM AKHTAR vs THE STATE
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from F.I.R. No. 109, registered at Police Station Tanda, District Gujrat, involving charges under sections 302 and 201 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, a female accused, was entitled to bail given the circumstances of the case, including a significant delay in lodging the F.I.R., the unwitnessed nature of the alleged crime, and the lack of incriminating evidence directly linking the petitioner to the act. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail, noting that the alleged confession was extracted under torture, the cause of death remained unascertained by medical examination, and the recovery of the skeleton was attributed to a co-accused rather than the petitioner. The court emphasized that the petitioner's role was secondary and that the case required further inquiry. Crucially, the court affirmed that under the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, female accused persons are entitled to a concession in bail matters, irrespective of the gravity of the alleged offense.
- Does the first proviso to section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 grant a mandatory concession to female accused persons regarding bail?
- Does a confession extracted under torture provide sufficient grounds to deny bail?
- When does a case against an accused qualify for further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 201, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Through this petition Mst. Nasim Akhtar petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.109 registered at Police Station, Tanda, District, Gujrat on 23-7-2003 for offences under sections 302/ 201, P.P.C.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed that the F.I.R. In this case had been lodged with a delay of about three years and admittedly the alleged murder in question had remained unwitnessed. According to the F.I.R. The petitioner had confessed her guilt before the complainant but such confession had admittedly been made by the petitioner after application of torture upon her by the complainant. It is not disputed that the doctor conducting post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased had remained unable to ascertain the cause of her death and it is not denied that the skeleton recovered in this case had been recovered at the pointing out of Saifullah co-accused and not at the instance of the petitioner. Even according to the F.I.R. Itself the petitioner had not caused any injury to the deceased and her role in the alleged murder was merely secondary in nature to that attributed to Saifullah co-accused. The petitioner is a woman and the provisions of the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Envisage a concession in the matter of bail for female accused persons irrespective of the gravity of the offences allegedly committed by them. The challan in this case has already been submitted after completion of investigation and, thus, continued custody of the petitioner in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage.
3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into her guilt within the purview, of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Besides attracting the provisions of the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 1 case
- Razia Nawaz vs Razia Nawaz 2020 MLD 1508