JAAN MUHAMMAD alias ADNAN vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the petitioner, Jaan Muhammad alias Adnan, who was implicated in a criminal case registered under the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979 and the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the evidentiary discrepancies and the status of other co-accused. The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail. The ratio of the decision rests on several factors: the statements of the alleged abductees recorded before a Judicial Magistrate indicated they left home voluntarily, contradicting the prosecution's case and rendering the matter one of further inquiry; the fact that all other accused nominated in the F.I.R. had already been granted bail; the significant delay in implicating the petitioner; the lack of progress in the trial; and the fact that the petitioner was no longer required for investigation. The Court affirmed that where prosecution evidence is contradicted by judicial statements of alleged victims, a case for further inquiry is established, justifying the grant of bail.
- Does a statement by alleged abductees before a Judicial Magistrate claiming voluntary departure constitute grounds for further inquiry in a bail application?
- Is the fact that all other co-accused have been granted bail a relevant consideration for the release of a subsequent petitioner?
- Does a significant delay in implicating an accused person in an F.I.R. support the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance 1979
- Section 13, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance 1979
- Section 16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance 1979
- Section 337-F(v), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' NASIM SIKANDAR, petitioner was arrested on 9-10-2005 in case F.I.R. No,41, dated 29-3-2005 under sections 10, 13 and 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979 read with section 337-F(v), P.P.C. Police Station Pind Dadan Khan, District Jhelum. Earlier his application for concession of post-arrest bail was rejected by Additional Sessions Judge, Jhelum on 14-11-2005.
2. One Muhammad Zafar son of Khush Hal Khan resident of Dhodi, District Jhelum lodged the above said F.I.R. Alleging abduction of her two married daughters namely Mst. Ghulam Zohra and Mst.
Robin by Ghulam Shabbir with the active assistance of Shamim Adil son of Ghulam Muhammad, Javed son of Muhammad Ali Kora, Sajid son of Muhammad Ali, Naseem Begum widow of Muhammad Ali and Irshad Bibi wife of Abdul Rehman residents of the village. Subsequently the name of the present petitioner was also included in the list of accused on the statement of the mother of the alleged abductees.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the State I am inclined to allow the concession of post- arrest bail to the petitioner for the following reasons:-- ' First, the allegations made against the petitioner are against the statements of the alleged abductees, dated 20-10-2005 recorded by Mr. Abdul Qayyum, Civil Judge/ Judicial Magistrate, Karachi South in Criminal Cases Nos. 39 and 40. In these statements both the alleged abductees stated to have left their home at their own will. These statements when juxtaposed with those subsequently made before Police in this case make the case of the petitioner to be that of further inquiry; ' Second, all the accused nominated in the F.I.R. Have already been enlarged on bail; ' Third, the petitioner was included in the list of accused on the statement of the mother of the alleged abductees after almost 6 months of the registration of the case; ' Fourth, although incomplete challan in the case was submitted on 3-11-2005, yet no evidence has so far been recorded. Therefore, the completion of the trial does not appear in sight; and ' Lastly, the petitioner is no more required for investigation. His claim of being a previous non- convict is also not seriously challenged by the prosecution.
4. Therefore, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.