GHULAM MUSTAFA vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition filed by Ghulam Mustafa seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 138 of 2009 registered at Police Station Saddar Gujranwala under Section 376 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail in light of the complainant's affidavit exonerating him, the absence of any direct allegation of Zina against him, a delay in lodging the F.I.R. and medical examination, and a negative chemical examiner report. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and held that the petitioner is entitled to bail. The key principle laid down is that where the prosecutrix and her husband exonerate an accused through an affidavit, no direct allegation of the substantive offence is attributed to him, and the chemical examiner's report is negative, reasonable grounds exist for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, warranting the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Whether an accused is entitled to post-arrest bail when the complainant and primary witness exonerate him through an affidavit?
- Does the absence of a direct allegation of Zina combined with a negative chemical examiner report warrant the grant of bail?
- Whether delay in lodging the F.I.R. and medical examination can be considered as grounds for further inquiry for the grant of bail?
- Section 376, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' PERVAIZ ALI CHAWLA, J.--Ghulam Mustafa son of Muhammad Basheer, petitioner, seeks post- arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,138 of 2009, dated 2-3-2009, registered at Police Station Saddar Gujranwala for an offence under section 376 P.P.C.
2. The allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. Is that the petitioner Dr. Ghulam Mustafa along with his co-accused Muhammad Taqi and two unknown persons encircled Mst. Bushra Bibi complainant, when she was going towards the Dera of Zafar to fetch some money from her husband, and thereafter Muhammad Taqi his co-accused made the complainant to lay on the agricultural field and committed Zina-bil-Jabar with her; the alarm raised by her attracted her husband Shahid son of Muhammad Tufail and Muhammad Parvaiz son of Mastay Khan; on seeing the P.Ws. The accused fled away from the scene of occurrence.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted an affidavit of Mst. Bushra Bibi the complainant and her husband Muhammad Shahid P.W. To contend that both of them have exonerated the petitioner and have maintained that due to suspicion his name was given in the F. I.
R. The learned counsel further submitted that there is no allegation of zina against the petitioner; that there is delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R. And four days in the medical examination.
Hence he prayed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General has opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner. However, he has admitted that the chemical examiner report of the alleged victim is negative.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned law Officer and have gone through the record.
6. Since the complainant/prosecutrix and Muhammad Shahid her husband both have exonerated the petitioner and there is no allegation of commission of Zina against him, moreover, the report of chemical examiner is negative, therefore, I admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Magistrate.