SHEHNAZ RASHID and another vs THE STATE
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a petition for pre-arrest bail in respect of F.I.R. No. 189 of 2007 registered at Police Station Mustafabad, District Kasur, under sections 148, 149, 354, 337-A(ii), and 337-F of the Pakistan Penal Code. During the hearing, the petition was not pressed and consequently dismissed as withdrawn qua the second petitioner. As regards the first petitioner, a female, the core legal question involved the entitlement of a female accused to pre-arrest bail where the alleged offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause and the specific non-bailable injury is not attributed to her. The court held that the petitioner's case called for further inquiry and that, being a lady, she was entitled to the concession of bail under the second proviso to section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The pre-arrest bail was accordingly confirmed subject to furnishing bail bonds.
- Is a female petitioner entitled to bail under the second proviso of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when specific non-bailable injuries are not attributed to her?
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be confirmed when the case against the accused falls within the scope of further inquiry?
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 354, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' HASNAT AHMAD KHAN, J.--- Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No: 189/2007, dated. 31-5- 2007 registered at Police Station Mustafabad District Kasur in respect of offences under sections 148, 149, 354, 337-A(ii) and 337-F(4, P. P. C .
2. After arguing the case at some length learned counsel for the petitioners has opted not to press this petition to the extent of Abdul Rashid, petitioner No,2. Therefore the application in hand qua Abdul Rashid, petitioner No,2, is dismissed as having been withdrawn.
3. As far as Shehnaz Rasheed, petitioner, is concerned learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is lady who has been involved in this case due to the mala fides of the police as well as complainant and that the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner does not fall within the prohibitory clause.
4. Conversely, the learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has lackadaisically opposed the bail application.
5. After hearing the arguments of both the sides, I have concluded that the injury falling within the purview of offence under section 337-A(ii), P.P.C. Which is a non-bailable offence has not been attributed to the petitioner whose case even otherwise requires further inquiry. The petitioner being a lady is entitled to bail under IInd proviso of section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, the application in hand is accepted and ad interim pre-arrest bail granted in favour of Shehnaz Rasheed petitioner, is hereby confirmed subject to her furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs,30,000 (Rupees thirty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.