Nehal vs The State and another
This criminal petition arises from a bail matter where the petitioner sought pre-trial or post-arrest relief after being accused of violating the prosecutrix at gunpoint inside her home and threatening to upload her pictures on the internet. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, given the incriminating medical evidence, prompt reporting, and corroborative circumstances connecting him to the crime. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the petitioner's injuries corresponded with the time of the occurrence, and the investigative conclusions coupled with the prosecutrix's statement constituted reasonable grounds under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, precluding his release on bail as no further probe was required. The Court laid down the principle that consistent medical evidence, prompt reporting, and lack of mala fide on the part of the complainant outweigh assertions for bail in heinous offenses like rape.
- Whether reasonable grounds exist under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 to refuse bail to an accused charged with rape?
- Does a medical certificate indicating injuries sustained at the time of the occurrence constitute corroborative evidence against an accused seeking bail?
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with the concurrent exercise of discretion by lower courts in refusing post-arrest bail when no further probe is required?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
QAZI M UHAM M AD AM IN AHM ED J. Nehal, petitioner, is blamed to have violated Mst. Tabassam, on gun point, inside her home at 6:30 p.m. on 15.3.2020 within the precincts of Police Station Topi, District Sawabi; he also threatened to upload her pictures on the internet; during the assault, her husband surprised the petitioner, who took to the heels, subsequently arrested with healed wounds.
The prosecutrix was medically examined on the eventful day; she shared the history of carnal assault with the Medical Officer, who noted a bruise near the base of index finger with both feet swollen and recommended referral for radiography.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. The petitioner by his own choice has placed on record prescription/medical certificate, issued by an orthopedic/ spine surgeon dated 16.3.2020 that indicates fracture of a foot, suggested by the Investigating Officer as result of a fall during his quest to flee from the scene. It appears that prosecutrix was also thrashed, though seemingly without fault. Duration of the injuries suffered by the assailant corresponds with the time of occurrence mentioned in the crime report; he lived in the neighborhood and apparently neither the prosecutrix nor her husband, an electrician, who managed a shop, usually throughout the day, had an axe to grind at the cost of their family honour. Investigative conclusions vindicate stance taken by the prosecutrix whose statement coupled with the attending circumstances of the case constitute reasonable grounds within the contemplation of subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, standing in impediment to his release on bail, in the absence of any consideration calling for further probe, therefore, exercise of discretion by the Courts below being well within the remit of law calls for no interference. Criminal Petition fails. Leave declined.
Cited by 3 cases
- Jannat Gull vs The State etc 2025 LHC 368
- Jannat Gull Versus State 2026 YLR 680
- Aziz-Ur-Rehman alias Babul vs The State 2022 PCRLJ 828