RASHEED alias SHEEDI vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under section 377 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, read with section 12 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, concerning allegations of unnatural carnal intercourse with a minor. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail based on alleged mala fides and his claimed status as a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000. The Lahore High Court held that the offence fell within the prohibitory clause, that no mala fides were established during the investigation, and that the question of age determination as a juvenile must first be adjudicated by the proper court of law under section 7 of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000, rather than through an inquiry by the High Court at the bail stage. Consequently, the court dismissed the bail petition, establishing that a high court will not conduct a primary age inquiry for bail under juvenile laws when the matter must first be addressed by the proper forum.
- Whether an accused charged with an offence falling within the prohibitory clause is entitled to bail without establishing mala fides in the police investigation?
- Can the High Court conduct an inquiry into the age of an accused claiming to be a juvenile for the purpose of bail under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000?
- Must an accused seeking the benefit of juvenility for bail first have his age determined by the proper court of law under section 7 of the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000?
- Section 377, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 12, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979
- Section 7, Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000
ORDER
' IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- Petitioner seeks bail after arrest in case F.I.R. No,26, dated 5-2-2003 under section 377, P.P.C., read with section 12 Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 registered at Police Station Farid Town, Sahiwal.
2. Briefly the allegation against the petitioner is that on the fateful day when the complainant was out of his house and his son Luqman was playing outside the home, he was taken away by the petitioner and thereafter, in the house of one Akram Machhi he committed carnal intercourse with Luqman.
3. Learned counsel contends that petitioner has been malafidely involved in this false case as sister of the petitioner Mst. Nasreen was joked in Bazaar by brother of the alleged victim whereupon she had slapped him and get revenge of that insult this story has been concocted. It ' is further argued that petitioner is minor and under Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000, he is entitled to bail as of right.
4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the petition.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. Serious allegation has been levelled against the petitioner which offence falls within the prohibitory clause and during investigation nothing has come on record show any mala fides on the part of the complainant or the police to falsely involve the petitioner in such an offence. As regards the ground of juvenile, the petitioner may first get his age determined from the proper Court of law under section 7 of the Juvenile Justice- System Ordinance, 2000. At this stage this Court cannot hold inquiry regarding the age of the petitioner. For the present no case for bail is made out. This petition, therefore, is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD IQBAL vs THE STATE and another 2007 P Cr. L J 976