MUHAMMAD NADEEM vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a bail petition filed by Muhammad Nadeem, who was arrested on March 13, 2004, in connection with F.I.R. No. 79 dated March 8, 2004, registered at Police Station Chak Bedi, District Pakpattan, for an offense under section 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail considering the delay in lodging the F.I.R., the petitioner being declared innocent during police investigation, and the non-commencement of the trial. The court held that since the petitioner was found to be innocent during the investigation and the trial has not yet commenced, it is a fit case for the grant of bail. The court laid down the principle that an accused found innocent during investigation, where trial is delayed, may be admitted to bail subject to furnishing appropriate security bonds.
- Whether an accused found innocent during police investigation is entitled to post-arrest bail?
- Does an unexplained delay in lodging the F.I.R. make the prosecution case a matter of further inquiry for the purpose of bail?
- Whether the non-commencement of the trial justifies the grant of bail to an accused in judicial custody?
- Section 18, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, J.---As per F.I.R. On 24-2-2004 the petitioner caught hold of Mst.
Shabnam Aslam complainant and attempted to commit Zina-bil-Jabr with her, whereas case was registered on 8-3-2004. The petitioner was arrested on 13-3-2004. Hence this bail petition.
2. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Further submits that there is delay of 13 days in lodging the F.I.R. And the same has not been explained by the complainant which makes the prosecution story doubtful. He contended that during investigation petitioner/found to be innocent. He further contended that petitioner is in judicial lock-up since 13-3-2004 but trial has not commenced so far, therefore he deserves concession of bail.
4. On the other hand learned counsel for the State has opposed this application on the grounds that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. And he attempted to commit Zina-bil-Jabr with the complainant and that delay in lodging the F.I.R. Has been explained.
5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties with care. The allegation against the petitioner is that he caught hold of Mst. Shabnam Aslam, complainant and attempted to commit Zina-bil-bar with her. Muhammad Shahbaz, A.S.-I. Present in Court, states that during investigation petitioner was found to be innocent A and that challan has already been submitted in Court. According to learned counsel for the petitioner trial has not commenced so far.
As stated earlier during investigation petitioner was found to be innocent. As such in the circumstances of the case I find it a fit case for grant of bail to Muhammad Nadeem petitioner. So application brought by him is accepted and he is allowed bail (in case F.I.R. No.79/2004 dated 8-3- 2004, Offence under section 18 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of A Hadood) Ordinance, 1979 registered at Police Station Chak Bedi, District Pakpattan) subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (rupees fifty thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.