Mubashir Hussain vs The State and another
This petition was filed under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking post-arrest bail in a case involving allegations of rape, extortion, and enticement for illicit intercourse. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the circumstances of the case, specifically the delay in FIR registration and conflicting statements by the alleged victim. The Court observed that the FIR was registered with a delay of over one month, suggesting deliberation. Furthermore, the alleged victim had previously stated in a private complaint that she married the petitioner of her own free will, only later resiling from this position after returning to her parents. The Court held that the petitioner's case fell within the scope of 'further inquiry' under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Emphasizing that the petitioner was a first-time offender and the investigation was complete, the Court granted bail, establishing the principle that unexplained delays in FIR registration and contradictory statements by the complainant party can constitute grounds for further inquiry in bail matters.
- Does an unexplained delay in the registration of an FIR constitute grounds for further inquiry in a bail application?
- Can a case be considered one of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the alleged victim has provided contradictory statements regarding the nature of their relationship with the accused?
- Is the completion of an investigation and the fact that an accused is a first-time offender a relevant factor in granting post-arrest bail?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 376, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 384, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 496-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Through this petition under section 497 Cr.P.C. the petitioner Mubashir Hussain has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.185/2015 dated 27.03.2015 under sections 376, 384, 496-A PPC, Police Station Manawan, Lahore.
2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record of this case has also been perused with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreci ation is not allowed at this stage. It has been noticed that although the petitioner is named in FIR, yet the fact remains that there is a delay of one month and three days in registration of FIR which has not been explained by the complainant, which prima facie reflects that the FIR has been got recorded after due deliberation and consultation. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 24.02.2015 he alongwith co-accused Muhammad Saddique enticed away the daughter of complainant for committing rape with her. It has also been noticed by this Court that the alleged abductee Mst. Mugheera Tahir has filed a private complaint against her father and brother alongwith other relatives in which she has categorically stated in her cursory statement before the learned Magistrate Okara that being sui-juris she has contracted marriage with the petitioner on 20.2.2015 with her free will and consent and in this regard copy of the Nikah Nama is attached with this petition. Thereafter when Mst. Mugheera Tahir joined her parents she has taken somersault and has levelled allegations of rape against the present petitioner alongwith co-accused in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. It is common practice in our society that parents of the girl usually got register FIR against the boy and his family members due to the grudge that their daughter had contracted love marriage and the girl/alleged abductee also resile from her earlier statement/version. Besides Mst. Mugheera Tahir the alleged abductee has filed suit for dissolution of marriage against the petitioner Mubashir Hussain which is pending adjudication before the court of learned Judge Family Court, Wazirabad which is a proper forum to decide such matters.
Reliance can easily be placed upon case titled as (Muhammad Azam vs. Muhammad Iqbal and others) PLD 1984 SC 95.
Admittedly the petitioner is previous non-c onvict and never involved in any other case. He is behind the bars since 18.04.2015. Investigation of the case is complete and the petitioner is no more required for further investigation. His further incarceration in jail would not serve any useful purpose.
3. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioner becomes one of further inquiry covered by sub- section (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. This petitio n is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is granted bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.