ABDUL RAZZAQ Versus State
This petition for post-arrest bail arises from a criminal case registered under sections 302/34/109 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, involving the alleged murder of Mst. Haleema Bibi by strangulation. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail given the prosecution's evidence, specifically considering the delay in lodging the F.I.R., contradictions between the initial Rapat and the F.I.R., and the inconclusive medical evidence regarding the cause of death. The Court held that the petitioner was entitled to bail, finding that the prosecution's case required further inquiry. The Court observed that the medical report was uncertain regarding the cause of death, noting only potential asphyxia, and highlighted significant discrepancies between the ocular account in the F.I.R. and the earlier Rapat. Applying the principle that where the prosecution's case rests on evidence that is contradictory or inconclusive, the matter falls within the scope of further inquiry, the Court granted post-arrest bail to the petitioner, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds, pursuant to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Does a contradiction between the initial Rapat and the F.I.R. regarding the circumstances of death justify a grant of bail?
- Can bail be granted when the medical evidence is inconclusive regarding the cause of death?
- When does a criminal case fall within the scope of 'further inquiry' under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 109, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
ABDUL SATTAR GORAYA, J.--- Through this petition, the petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 193 of 2008, dated 5-7-2008, registered under sections 302/34/109, P.P.C. for causing death of Haleema Bibi daughter of Nazar Muhammad son of Haji Jamal at Police Station Mcload Gunj, District Bahawalnagar.
2. The prosecution case as disclosed in the F.I.R. is that on the fateful day i.e. 22-6-2008 in the evening time, Sadiq son of Muhammad Sharif telephonically informed that the petitioner was quarrelling with Mst. Haleema Bibi and he was using filthy language against her whereupon he reached the house of her daughter along with his son Muhammad Akram, who in the first instance at about 10-00 p.m. met Allah Ditta and Rehmat Bibi in-laws of daughter who were on a walking track but were looking to be in a depressed condition. The complainant and his son saw from the inside of door that Abdul Razzaq son of Allah Ditta was pressing neck of Haleema Bibi and was sitting on her belly. Muhammad Abbas son of Allah Ditta co-accused and the petitioner were catching hold of her arms. On hue and cry raised by the complainant, the accused succeeded to decamp. The complainant and his son when entered into the room they saw their daughter was done to death.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that three co-accused of the petitioner have been found innocent of the charge and if the evidence of the prosecution has been declared to be incorrect or unture, to the extent of the remaining three accused, the same cannot be as a gospel truth against the petitioner. Further argued that F.I.R was registered with a delay of 13 days for which there is no plausible explanation and delay if not explained it causes serious effect into the case of the prosecution.
4. Learned DPG has seriously opposed the application tooth and nail and he came out with the plea that there could be no enmity between the complainant against his son-in-law and it is not the case of belated F.I.R. as on the same day Rapat No.10 was recorded in respect of the occurrence. He further argued that this is necessarily a case of capital charge and falls within the prohibition contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
5. I have given the conscious thought to the submissions made by both the parties and with their able assistance have gone through the record.
6. In Rappat Rozenamcha bearing No.10 recorded on 23-6-2008, the complainant stated that about 6-00 a.m. in the morning one Abdul Razzaq telephonically informed that her daughter Mst. Haleema Bibi joined the majority 'and requested her parents to reach soon. The prosecution built upon the case that death of Mst. Haleema Bibi was the result of strangulation. Medical evidence in the Post-mortem Report conducted by the Medical Officer, DHQ Minchinabad, he recorded that few abrasions are observed around the neck and on front of left arm. In his finding, cause of death may be due to asphyxia/suffocation as there are abrasions around the neck. Even the doctor is not certain about the cause of death and the medical report also created suspicion. There is also a delay of 13 days in lodging the F.I.R. There is a contradiction between the ocular account given in the F.I R. and the Rappat No.10 recorded on 23-6-2008.
7. In view of the above, the case of the petitioner is of further inquiry within the parameters of the law provided in subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. The petitioner is granted bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
H.B.T./A-60/L Bail granted.