SHAUKAT. vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 722 of 2007 registered under sections 365-B and 376 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Langrana, District Jhang. The core legal question was whether the petitioner made out a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 given that the alleged abductee did not level allegations of Zina and refused medical examination. The Lahore High Court held that the case against the petitioner at best fell under section 365 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and warranted further inquiry into his guilt. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and granted post-arrest bail to the petitioner subject to furnishing appropriate bail bonds. The key principle laid down is that where the primary victim does not support the core allegations of a heinous offence during investigation, the case constitutes a matter of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, justifying the grant of bail.
- Does a case fall under subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the alleged abductee refuses medical examination and does not support the charge of Zina?
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted under section 365-B and 376 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 when the primary witness fails to support the prosecution version during recovery?
- Is further inquiry into the guilt of an accused attracted when the prosecution evidence prima facie reduces the gravamen of the charge?
- Section 365, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 365-B, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 376, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD AHSAN BHOON, J.---Petitioner (Shaukat son of Ameer caste Mirasi) seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 722 of 2007, dated 8-11-2007 offence under sections 365-B and 376, P.P.C.
Registered with Police Station, Langrana, District, Jhang.
2. Briefly the allegation in the F.I.R. Is that on 6-11-2007 when the complainant along with his wife Mst. Samina Bibi was coming back to his house after participation in marriage ceremony, his wife Mst. Samina Bibi was abducted by the accused/petitioner and others forcibly for the purpose of committing Zina-bil-Jabr with her.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, I have found that alleged abductee Mst. Samina Bibi, after recovery did not level allegation of Zina against the petitioner or any of the accused rather she also refused to get herself medically examined. The star witness of the prosecution, who is alleged abductee A does not support the prosecution version, at the most if the whole story is believed the case against the petitioner remains only under section 365, P.P.C. So in this view of the matter case of the petitioner requires further inquiry qua his guilt and falls within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. For what has been discussed above, this petition is allowed and petitioner is granted post-arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.