MUHAMMAD SALEEM alias KADDA vs STATE and another
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a criminal case registered under Sections 365-B and 376 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for alleged abduction and commission of zina. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail in view of the delayed FIR, his exoneration during police investigation, and the establishment of a valid marriage between the alleged abductee and a co-accused. The Lahore High Court held that the unexplained delay of twenty-six days in lodging the FIR, the finding of innocence during the investigation, the verification of the nikah, and the non-recovery of the abductee from the petitioner collectively created sufficient doubt regarding his involvement to warrant further inquiry. The Court allowed the petition and admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that where an investigation declares an accused innocent, a delay in lodging the FIR exists, and the foundational matrimonial relationship claimed by the defense is verified, the case falls within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, justifying the grant of bail.
- Does an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR combined with a finding of innocence during investigation justify granting post-arrest bail?
- Whether the verification of a marriage contracted by the alleged abductee creates a case for further inquiry under criminal law?
- Can bail be granted when the alleged abductee is not recovered from the physical custody of the accused petitioner?
- Section 365-B, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 376, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Muhammad Saleem alias Kadda/petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case FIR No, 438, registered at Police Station Saddar Burewala, District Vehari, on 10-10-2008, for offences under Sections 365- B/376, PPC.
2. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with co-accused forcibly abducted Mst Bashiran Bibi for the purpose of commission of zina.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Mst. Bashiran/complainant had illicit relations with Nadeem Abbas co-accused, with whom she contracted marriage out of her free will vide Nikah. Nama dated 16-09-2008; that the petitioner has been declared innocent during investigation; and that there is a delay of 26 days in lodging the FIR, which by itself creates doubt the prosecution case.
4. On the other side neither the DPG nor complainant is present.
5. Heard and record perused.
6. It is admitted fact that there is unexplained delay of 26 days in lodging the FIR. The A.S.I, present in Court alongwith record, verified that the petitioner has been declared innocent during investigation and that Nikah between Nadeem Abbas and Mst. Bashiran has been found correct. It is also admitted fact that alleged abductee was not recovered from the petitioner and she herself appeared to lodge the FIR. All these facts create doubts regarding the involvement of petitioner in the commission of offence. During investigation Nikah of the alleged abductee with Nadeem Abbas co-accused has been found correct. In these circumstances, case of the petitioner needs further probe.
7. Consequently, I allow this petition and admit the petitioner to bail, on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rupees Two Lacs (Rs, 2,00,000/-), with one surety, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.