MUHAMMAD AFZAL vs STATE, etc.
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by Muhammad Afzal, who is accused in F.I.R. No. 123/2015 regarding offences under Sections 376 and 511 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question is whether the petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail given the nature of the allegations and his criminal history. The Lahore High Court dismissed the bail petition. The Court held that the petitioner was specifically named in the F.I.R. for dragging the victim and attempting to commit Zina, with supporting statements recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Furthermore, the Court noted the petitioner's involvement in a prior similar offence, indicating a habitual pattern of criminal conduct. The Court emphasized that the offence falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, as it entails a punishment of not less than ten years. Consequently, the Court found sufficient incriminating material to connect the petitioner to the offence, rendering him ineligible for bail.
- Does an offence punishable by ten years or more fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can a history of similar criminal offences be considered when deciding a post-arrest bail application?
- Is a petitioner entitled to bail when there is sufficient incriminating material on record connecting them to the alleged offence?
- Section 376, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 511, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 7, Anti-Terrorism Act 1997
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' The petitioner namely Muhammad Afzal seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 123/2015 dated 14.04.2015 offence under Sections 376, 511, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station, Ghaziabad, District Sahiwal.
2. Briefly the prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. Is that he along with his co-accused while intoxicant condition caught hold the sister of the complainant, dragged her to their house and outraged her modesty and made attempt to commit Zina with her.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
4. Admittedly, the petitioner is named in the FIR with specific role of catching hold, dragging and also making attempt of committing Zina with the sister of the complainant by opening the string of her shalwar. Record further reveals that the petitioner is habitual of committing such like offences.
Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted a copy of report under Section 173, Cr.P.C.
Submitted in case FIR No. 179/2015 dated 23 05.2015 under Section 376, PPC registered at Police Station read with Section 7 ATA wherein .The petitioner along with his other co-accused committed similar offence of committing Zina. This offence is not only against the victim, rather it is also against the society and according to Injunctions of Islam the nature of such like offences is much heinous. Normally in our society no one is ready to outrage their woman folk by their own hands by leveling such heinous allegation against their enemies. In the instant case, the allegation against the petitioner is an attempt of committing Zina but at the same time, it is also alleged that a woman folk has been dragged in the street and while dragging her clothes were also torn and she was exposed at public view. The offence with which the petitioner is being charged entails punishment not less then 10-years, therefore, his case, in any case falls within prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. The complainant and PWs fully supported the prosecution version in their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. Sufficient incriminating material against the petitioner is on record to connect him with the commission of offence.
5. In this view of the matter, I am not inclined to accept this petition of post arrest bail, as such the same is dismissed having no force.