ABDUL REHMAN alias REHMI Versus THE STATE
This is a post-arrest bail petition arising from a criminal case registered under Section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 read with Section 380 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, concerning allegations of abduction and theft. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to post-arrest bail in light of the alleged abductee's statements denying abduction and affirming a valid marriage with a co-accused prior to the incident. The Lahore High Court held that the case fell within the scope of further inquiry into guilt under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, noting the abductee's statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, her personal appearance in court affirming her free-will marriage, and the absence of any Zina allegations against the petitioners. The court laid down the principle that consistent denials of abduction by the alleged victim, supported by a prior Nikahnama and statements before a magistrate, constitute grounds for further inquiry warranting the grant of bail.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when the alleged abductee denies the allegation of abduction and states she contracted a valid marriage of her own free will?
- Does the absence of any allegation of Zina against the petitioners in a case registered under the Offence of Zina Ordinance make their case one of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 11, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 380, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Abdul Rehman alias Rehmi and Rizwan petitioners through the post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.220 dated 19-5-2003, under section 11 Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 read with section 380- P.P.C. registered with Police Station Ghalla Mandi, Sahiwal.
2. Briefly the prosecution case as per F.I.R. is that on 30-3-2003 at about 7-30 a.m. Abdul Rehman alias Rehmi and others had abducted Mst. Nasira Zaid, the daughter of the complainant for Nikah with co -accused Imran. They had also stolen away gold ornaments and cash amount Rs.7,000 from his house while doing so.
3. It has been contended on their behalf that they have falsely been roped in; that they have. nothing to do with the, alleged offence; that Abdul Rehman alias Rehmi (petitioner No.1) is father of the main accused Imran and Rizwan (petitioner No.2) his brother and they have been involved due to his relationship with him alone that the alleged abductee had entered into valid Nikah with Imran on 17-3-2003 while the alleged incident had taken place thereafter; that she (abductee) had appealed' before the learned Ilaqa Magistrate and has made statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. there refuting the allegation of her abduction as contained in the F.I.R.; that she had also brought two writ petitions before this Court and one of these was for quashment of the instant F.I.R. and other for the protection to her against the illegal harassment caused to her and all these facts render their case as one of further inquiry into their guilt; and that they are behind the bars since 25-5-2003 and previous non-convicts.
4. Conversely, the learned State Counsel has opposed the petition on the ground that they along With others had enticod/abducted the said daughter of the complainant and had also stolen away the gold ornaments and cash amount Rs.7,000 from his house while doing so:
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made from both sides with the help of available record.
6. Allegedly, they along with others had abducted the said daughter of the complainant and also stolen away the gold ornaments and cash amount of Rs.7,000 from his house while doing so. There is with the petition, the copy of the Nikahnama between 'their co-accused Muhammad Imran and Mst. Nasira Zaid. The same shows that they have entered into Nikah with each other on 17-3-2003.
7. This, thus, was prior to the alleged incident. She is present in Court with Muhammad 1mran accused. The S. I. present in Court has identified them both. She had stated on Court query that she had entered into valid Nikah with Muhammad Imran of her free consent and nobody had abducted her or stolen away the gold ornaments or the said amounts from the house of her father.
8. Besides than this, there is also with the petition the copy of her statement recorded before the Magistrate under section 164, Cr.P.C. She in the same has completely refuted the allegation of her abduction as contained in the F.I.R. She previously had also brought Writ Petition No. 1927 of 2003 seeking protection against illegal' harassment caused to her and her husband. In the same, she had also put in appearance before this Court on 13-5-2003. The said petition was disposed of with the direction to the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 therein to proceed in her matter strictly in accordance with law.
9. Furthermore, there is no allegation of Zina against them (petitioners). In these circumstances, I find that their case is covered under subsection (2) of section 49", Cr.P.C. calling for further inquiry into their guilt. They are behind the bars and stated to be previous non-convicts. I, therefore, accept this petition and admit them to bail provided they furnish bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal/trial Court.
N.H.Q./A-906/L Bail allowed.