SAJJAD alias SAKKOO vs THE STATE

The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under sections 10 and 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 read with sections 380 and 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, relating to the alleged enticement of the complainant's daughter for committing Zina. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail considering the facts and circumstances of the case, including the delay in lodging the F.I.R. and the contents of the statement recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition, holding that the petitioner was entitled to bail as there was a two-month delay in lodging the F.I.R., the petitioner had been behind bars for three months, and he was not alleged to have committed Zina with the abductee, as corroborated by her statement under section 164. The key principle laid down is that unexplained delay in FIR registration combined with the absence of direct allegations of the core offence in the victim's statement under section 164, Cr.P.C., constitutes sufficient grounds for the grant of post-arrest bail.