GHULAM FARID and anothers vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail in a criminal case registered under the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The petitioners were accused of abducting the complainant for illicit purposes, with the complainant alleging she was held captive for six years and bore two children during that period. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to bail given the significant delay in lodging the First Information Report and the defense's claim of a lawful marriage. The Court held that the six-year delay in registration of the case, combined with the documentary evidence of a Nikahnama produced by the petitioner, created a situation of further inquiry. Consequently, the Court granted bail to the petitioners, establishing the principle that a substantial, unexplained delay in lodging an F.I.R., when coupled with prima facie evidence supporting the defense's version of events, entitles an accused to the concession of bail pending trial.
- Does a significant delay in lodging an F.I.R. constitute grounds for further inquiry in a bail application?
- Can the production of a Nikahnama by an accused in an abduction case justify the grant of post-arrest bail?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when the prosecution's case involves a six-year delay in reporting the alleged offense?
- Section 10(3), Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 11, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' Petitioners seek their post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,24 of 2000, dated 18-1-2000 registered under section 10(3)/11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No, VII, 1979 at Police Station Liaqatpur. Precise allegation against the petitioners as penned in the F.I.R. Is that they alongwith their co-accused forcibly abducted Mst. Kalsoom Bibi (complainant of the instant case) for the purpose of illicit liaison. Further that Mst. Kalsoom Bibi was kept by Ghulam Farid (petitioner) till the registration of this case and during this period, she gave birth to two children and now after the delay of six years the complainant found an opportunity to manage her escape from the clutches of the petitioners.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Mst. Kalsoom Bibi (the complainant) is legally- wedded wife of the petitioner namely Ghulam Farid as they got married on 11-2-1994 and that the present case has been registered against the petitioners with mala fide intention. It is also argued that Punnon petitioner (being real brother of the petitioner namely Ghulam Farid) has been arraigned as accused person, hence, in the circumstnaces of this ease both the petitioners are entitled to the concession of bail. Conversely, learned State Counsel has vehemently opposed the grant of bail.
3. After hearing both the parties and perusing the record, it has been observed that this case was got registered after six years of the occurrence. After the abduction of Mst. Kalsoom Bibi (complainant), she was kept with the petitioner namely Ghulam Farid as his wife and during this period, two children were born. The stand of the petitioner Ghulam Farid is that Mst. Kalsoom Bibi is his legally-wedded wife and in support of this stand, reliance has been placed on Nikahnama registered at Ward No,109-B, Rahimyar Khan. Long delay in lodging the F.I.R. Coupled with documents relied upon by the petitioners, prima facie, make out the case of the petitioners falling within the ambit of further enquiry entitling them to the grant of bail. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs,50,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned ,trial Court
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD ATIF vs THE STATE 2011 MLD 621