NA DEEM ABBAS vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a post-arrest bail application filed by the petitioner, Nadeem Abbas, who was charged under Section 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, for an alleged attempt to commit Zina-bil-Jabr. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances of the case, including allegations of a counter-blast motive and the delay in the conclusion of the trial. The Court observed that the petitioner had previously moved an application against the complainant's family regarding an earlier incident, suggesting the possibility of false implication. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner had been incarcerated since November 2006, and the trial was unlikely to conclude in the near future. Holding that the prosecution's evidence warranted further inquiry under the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court accepted the bail application. The key principle laid down is that where the circumstances suggest a potential for false implication and the trial is not likely to conclude promptly, the case falls within the scope of further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail.
- Does the existence of a prior application against the complainant's family by the accused raise a possibility of false implication sufficient for bail?
- When does a case fall under the category of further inquiry for the purpose of bail under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the prolonged incarceration of an accused without the likelihood of a near-future trial conclusion a valid ground for granting post-arrest bail?
- Section 18, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- The petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,228, registered with Police Station Chab Klan, District Khanewal on 7-9-2005 for an offence under section 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. The brief facts of the case as narrated in the F.I.R. Are; that on the fateful day i.e. 4-9-2005 his daughter Bushra Rafique aged 13/14 years went for cutting the grass from his field. At about 9-00 a.m. When she was coming back to her house lying the grass on her head the petitioner along with Muhammad Ilyas, who was duly armed with pistol, boarded on Motorcycle CD-70 arrived and caught Mst. Bushra Rafique and was removed her to a cline. Further stated in the F.I.R. That on the pistol point Mst. Bushra was directed by the petitioner to lay on earth who due to fear lay and the petitioner removed her trouser and broke the string of her daughter and tried to commit Zina-bil- Jabr. The co-accused Ilyas remained present there as a guard. The accused ran away after seeing the complainant with Muhammad Saeed and Muhammad Akhtar who arrived there after attracting the hue and cry raised by the victim.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that only the allegation against the petitioner is that he attempted to commit Zina with the victim, he was arrested on 13-11-2006 and there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in the near future. It is further contended that there is a cross- version of the petitioner that Mst. Mumtaz Bibi, sister of the petitioner was also assaulted by Fakhar son of the complainant and Muhammad Arshad nephew of the complainant and an application in this behalf was moved by the petitioner on 5-9-2005 one month before the registration of said case and the present case has been registered as a counter-blast.
4. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General opposes the bail application on the ground that the case on behalf of the accused party has been got registered after the registration of the present case. It is contended that the victim was aged about 13/14 years.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought on record a copy of the application which was moved by Abdul Hameed against Fakhar son of the petitioner and his nephew namely Arshad on-16-8-2005 that they had attempted to commit murder of Mst. Mumtaz Bibi daughter of Suba Khan at 10-00 a.m. And it is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the police did not register a case but it was registered on 11-9-2005 while the incident had allegedly taken place on 16-8-2005. The incident in the present case had taken place on 4-9-2005 and F.I.R. Was registered on 8-9-2005 and the noting of the said application by S.H.O. Police Station Chab Kalan is dated 5-9-2005, so the possibility of false implication of the petitioner in the present case cannot be ruled out. Even otherwise, the petitioner is behind the bars' since 13-11-2006 and report under section 173, Cr.P.C.
Has been submitted recently. There is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in the near future. Even otherwise, the evidence collected by the prosecution makes out a case of the petitioner that of further inquiry as covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, the present bail application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Raga Magistrate.