MUNIR AHMAD vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Munir Ahmad, who was charged under Section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979, read with Sections 338-G and 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, initially identified as a helper to the complainant rather than an accused, was entitled to bail given the nature of the allegations against him regarding abetment and concealment of facts. The Court observed that the petitioner was not originally named as an accused by the complainant or the victim, and that his co-accused had already been granted bail. Holding that the petitioner's case fell within the scope of further inquiry, the Court granted the post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that where the role attributed to an accused in the First Information Report is ambiguous or inconsistent with the initial complaint, and where the case requires further investigation, the accused is entitled to the benefit of bail under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Does the absence of the petitioner's name as an accused in the initial First Information Report constitute grounds for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is an accused entitled to post-arrest bail when the allegations against him involve abetment and concealment of facts but are inconsistent with the complainant's initial statements?
- Can an accused be granted bail if a co-accused facing similar allegations has already been admitted to bail by the Court?
- Section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 338-G, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' M. BILAL KHAN, J.-Munir Ahmad son of Nabi Bakhsh petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R.
No.328 of 2005 dated 16-9-2005, registered with Police Station Saddar Gojra, District Toba Tek Singh, for offence under section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No.VII of 1979 read with sections 338-G, 109, P.P.C..
2. The case of the prosecution as it unfolded in the F.I.R. Has been given in some detail in the order of this Court of even date passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.5033-B of 2006, therefore, the facts of the F.I.R. Need not be reiterated here.
3. Munir Ahmed the petitioner had been arrested on 13-4-2006, and is in custody eversince. His application for post-arrest bail had been turned down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Toba Tek Singh, vide order dated 6-2006.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length.
5. - After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and examining the record it has been observed right away that the role attributed to the petitioner in the F.I.R. Was not that of an accused person. In fact the complainant Mst. Zubaida Bibi wife of Munawar Hussain, had stated in the F.I.R.
That Munir Ahmed, was the one, who had tried to help her out and that having no one else to bank upon she had been helped out by the present petitioner, who had registered their complaint against with accused party. However, according to the record it transpired that at some later stage the petitioner had been relegated as. An accused person. The allegation against him was that his son committed Zina with Mst. Razia Bibi and that the petitioner had abetted the said offence by concealment of true facts. Whatsoever, be the nature of allegations the fact remains that the petitioner had not been arraigned as an accused person either by the complainant or by the victim. Mst. Razia Bibi, who has also been arraigned as an accused, has been allowed bail by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 5033-B of 2006, today.
6. In view of the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. And examining the facts in their true perspective the case of the petitioner is one of further inquiry as contemplated in subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner is admitted to post-arrest bail, subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.