MUHAMMAD QASIM And Another vs THE STATE And Another
This petition for leave to appeal arose from the cancellation of post-arrest bail granted to two police officers accused of offences under sections 365, 342, and 506 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, read with section 12 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979. The complainant alleged that the petitioners attempted to commit sodomy upon him. While the Additional Sessions Judge initially granted post-arrest bail, the Lahore High Court subsequently cancelled it, prompting the petitioners to approach the Supreme Court. The core legal question concerned whether the High Court correctly exercised its discretion in cancelling the bail. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, noting that the complainant, a student from a respectable family, had no apparent motive to falsely implicate police officers, thereby tarnishing his own reputation. Furthermore, the Court observed an absence of previous enmity between the parties. The principle laid down is that in the absence of evidence of false implication or prior enmity, the credibility of a complainant's report is not easily discarded at the bail stage, justifying the cancellation of bail when serious allegations are supported by prima facie evidence.
- Is the absence of previous enmity a relevant factor in determining the validity of a criminal complaint for the purpose of bail?
- Does the cancellation of bail by a High Court require evidence of a motive for false implication by the complainant?
- Can a court refuse to grant bail where there is no prima facie reason for a complainant to falsely implicate the accused?
- Section 365, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 342, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 506, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 12, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
1. JAVID IQBAL J.--This petition for leave to appeal has been filed by Mohammad Qasim and Mohammad Zaheer petitioners both police officers against whom a case-has been registered on 14th February 1987 for offences under section 365/342/506/34, P.P.C. Read with section 12 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No. VII of 1979 at Police Station Multan Cantt. At the instance of Akmal Mir Khan, a student of F.A. And son of Postmaster, Head Post Office, Multan.
2. The allegation against the petitioners briefly is that they forcibly tried to commit sodomy on Akmal Mir Khan. The petitioners applied for bail before arrest which was rejected. Thereafter the lapse of ten days they applied for post arrest bail which was accepted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Multan vide his order dated 18th March 1987. Thereupon Akmal Mir Khan complainant filed petition for cancellation of bail granted to the respondents which was allowed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court Multan Bench. Hence the present petition for leave to appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners attempted to argue that Akmal Mir Khan complainant- respondent did not know the petitioners, could have not even known their names and could not even identify them. Therefore according to the learned counsel the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. It was also submitted that two PWs had given affidavits exonerating the petitioners. These arguments were also raised before the learned Single Judge who after considering them rejected the same for the reason that prima facie there would appear to be no reason for Akmal Mir Khan complainant who belonged to a respectable family and was F.A.
4. Student to have lodged a false report tarnishing his own character and inviting wrath of two police officers namely the present petitioners and that furthermore there was nothing on the record to show that there had been any previous enmity between the parties.