Aqib Saleem vs State etc
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in a case registered under Section 377 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving allegations of sodomy. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of bail given the evidentiary material available at the pre-trial stage. Upon review, the Court noted that the medical examination of the victim revealed no signs of injury or violence in the anal region, and the DNA test report was negative. Furthermore, the petitioner had no prior criminal record of a similar nature and was no longer required for investigation purposes. 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. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the petitioner was admitted to post-arrest bail, subject to furnishing bail bonds. The key principle laid down is that where medical and forensic evidence fails to corroborate the prosecution's allegations, the case warrants further inquiry, justifying the grant of bail pending trial.
- Does the absence of physical injury and a negative DNA report in a sodomy case constitute grounds for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is a petitioner entitled to post-arrest bail when they are no longer required for investigation and the prosecution's evidence is inconclusive?
- Section 377, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Aqib Saleem, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case FIR No. 32 dated 29.01.2020, offence under Section 377, PPC, registered at Police Station Bhalwal Saddar District Sargodha.
2. Precisely , the allegation against the petitioner is that he committed sodomy with Muhammad Hanan Farooq son of the complainant.
3. Heard.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner , as well as learned Law Officer and perusing the available record with their assistance it has been noted by me that according to the doctor , there was no injury sign around anal or in anal canal. No marks of violence has been observed by the doctor on the body of the victim. The DNA test report of the victim is in the negative. As apprised by learned Law Officer, petitioner is not involved in any other case of such like nature. The petitioner is behind the bars since 22.12.2020 and no more required by the police for the purpose of investigation.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the case of petitioner calls for further inquiry within the ambit of sub-section (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, while relying upon case law titled as "Muhammad Nauman Hanif vs. The State and another" (2016 SCMR 1399) and "Mohsin vs. The State and others" (2017 SCMR 290) this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.
1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial. Court.
6. Before parting with this order , it is clarified that the observations made in this order are tentative in nature and relevant only for the disposal of this bail petition which shall not influence the learned trial Court in any manner , whatsoever .