GHULAM SAKINA And Others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns the detention of female prisoners with minor children in the Women Jail, Multan, and the broader issue of the incarceration of women with suckling infants in the Province of Punjab. The core legal question addressed is whether under-trial female prisoners accompanied by minor children are entitled to bail under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Upon reviewing the report from the Superintendent of Women Jail, Multan, the Court held that the identified under-trial female prisoners, who were caring for children aged between two months and two years, fell within the scope of the second proviso to Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court granted them bail, subject to furnishing surety bonds. Regarding convicted women, the Court clarified it lacked jurisdiction to suspend sentences for those convicted under the Hudood Ordinance, directing them to the Federal Shariat Court. The Court further emphasized the duty of Sessions Judges to inspect jails and ensure the welfare of suckling babies and minor children, affirming that courts possess inherent, extensive powers to protect their interests.
- Are under-trial female prisoners with minor children entitled to bail under the second proviso to Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Does the High Court have jurisdiction to suspend the execution of sentences for women convicted under the Hudood Ordinance?
- What are the powers of Sessions Judges regarding the inspection of jails and the protection of minor children detained with their mothers?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Hudood Ordinance, 1979
- Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
The report submitted by the Superintendent Women Jail, Multan, reveals that 30 women having minor children are detained in Women Jail Multan. Out of them 18 women are under-trial prisoners and the remaining are convicts.
2. After hearing the learned Additional Advocate-General, I find that the under-trial prisoners women namely Mst. Ghulam Sakina, Mst. Zahooran, Mst. Fatima, Mst, Sughran, Mst. Bashiran, Mst.
Gullan Mai, Mst. Shah Mai, Mst. Husina, Mst. Zubida Parvcen, Mst. Zarina daughter of Waryam, Mst.
Hafizan, Mst. Zainab, Mst. Zarina daughter of Mehmood and Mst. Irshad Bibi, mentioned at Serial Nos. 1, 2. 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 of the list of "under trial female prisoners confined in Women Jail Multan" supplied by Superintendent Women Jail, Multan, are carrying children aged 2 months to the age of 2 years. Their case fall within second proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. I feel that for the reasons given by me in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1112-B of 1990, the aforesaid women accused are entitled to be released from jail. So, they are allowed bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court trying them.
3. Copy of this order alongwith the Photostat copy of the list of undertrial prisoners marked 'A' shall immediately be sent to Superintendent Women Jail, Multan for information to the under-trial prisoners concerned. Copy of this order alongwith the copies of the list of the female prisoners marked `A' shall be sent to Duty Magistrate, Multan, Resident Magistrate, Multan, Resident Magistrate, Mailsi. Sessions Judge. Multan. Additional Sessions Judge, Camp at Shujabad, Additional Sessions Judge Camp at Mian Channu, Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh. Resident Magistrate, Muzaffargarh, Assistant Commissioner, Mian Channu, Resident Magistrate, Layyah and Sessions Judge, Vehari, for compliance.
4. As for the women convicted under Hudood Ordinance, this Court has no jurisdiction to suspend the execution of sentence. They may approach the Federal Shariat Court, if so advised.
5. As for the femals convicted under various sections of Pakistan Penal Code, the learned Additional Advocate-General wants to examine their cases.
The learned Additional Advocate-General will procure the list of all women who are pregnant or having suckling babies with them and are lodged in various jails of the Province of Punjab.
Inspector-General Prisons, Punjab, will depute the Officer not below the rank of D.I.-G. Prisons to assist the learned Additional Advocate-General and also appear before the Court on next date.
6. As for the women detained in district jails within the local jurisdiction of Multan Bench, learned Sessions Judge of the district will inspect the jail concerned in accordance with the High Court Rules and Orders and may pass orders in the light of the observations made by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1115-B of 1990. They shall protect/watch the welfare of the suckling babies and minor children detained in jails just like real mother. Needless to add that the Courts enjoy unlimited powers in this behalf.
7. Copy of this order alongwith the copy of the order passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.1112-B of 1990, be sent to the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal, Khanewal, Vehari, Dera Ghazi Khan, Muzaffargarh, Layyah and Rajanpur, for compliance.
8. For further proceedings, this case may be placed before me in the second week of January, 1991 at the Bench/Seat where I may be functioning at the time after obtaining the orders of my Lord, the Chief Justice, if necessary.
Cited by 5 cases
- Mst. Sangeeta vs The State and another 2022 PCRLJ 949
- Mst. PATHANI BIBI and others vs The STATE and otherss 2014 YLR 158
- RAWAIDAH BIBI vs The STATE and others 2014 MLD 7
- RWAIDAH BIBI vs The STATE and others 2014 MLD 284
- Mst. NASREEN vs STATE 1998 MLD 1350