ABDUL MAJEED vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition seeking post-arrest bail in a case registered under sections 10(3) and 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, on the allegations of abduction and Zina-bil-Jabr at pistol point. The core legal question is whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail in view of the delayed reporting, the exoneration of co-accused who were family members, and the lack of specific details regarding the place of confinement. The court held that the allegations require further probe and inquiry, particularly regarding whether the offense falls under Zina-bil-Jabr or simple Zina, and consequently allowed the bail petition. The key principle laid down is that where the prosecution story suffers from doubtful circumstances such as unexplained delays and the exoneration of co-accused facilitators, the case warrants further inquiry, making it a fit case for the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Whether delay in reporting the matter to the police and exoneration of co-accused makes the case one of further inquiry under section 497(2) Cr.P.C.?
- Can bail be granted when the allegations of Zina-bil-Jabr require further probe into the facts of abduction and confinement?
- Does the involvement of family members as co-accused who are subsequently found innocent cast doubt on the prosecution's case for the purpose of bail?
- Section 10(3), Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' The petitioner through this petition has sought his post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,665 dated 11-9- 2000 registered under ,sections 10(3)/16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, at Police Station Saddar, Pakpattan Sharif, on the statement of Mst. Shahida Bibi wife of Akbar Ali (victim).
2. The relevant facts as mentioned in the F.I.R. Are that according to the complainant on 3-9-2000 at about 8-00 p.m., she was abducted forcibly by the petitioner with the help of Mst. Naveeda Bibi, Abdul Sattar and Rasheed Ahmad. According to her Majeed Ahmad, petitioner, was armed with a pistol at the time of her abduction put her in a car and left with the complainant to an unknown place, where the petitioner had committed Zina-bil-Jabr with her forcibly on the pistol point and after three days the complainant got a chance to escape and so she reached her house and informed her father about the incident. It is also stated that the matter could not be reported to the Police soon after her escape because the petitioner had been beseeching for non-registration of the case. So the case was registered on 11-9-2000.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is unexplained delay of 8 days in reporting the matter to the Police; that Mst. Naveeda Bibi is the real sister, Adbul Sattar is the real father and Rasheed Ahmad is brother of the petitioner, who were mentioned as accused in the F.I.R.; that it is most unlikely that father and sister would join the accused in commission of such an offence; that the challan has not been submitted so far and delay in submission of challan by itself is a ground for bail as the law has been amended regarding the submission of challan.
4. The learned counsel for the State vehemently argues that there is an allegation of Zina-bil-Jabr against the petitioner, who had been committing the same at the pistol point. He is single accused and the case falls within the prohibitory clause. He admits that the petitioner was arrested on 3-10- 2000 and the challan is yet to be submitted before the Court for trial.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record. It is not a question of delay of 8 days in reporting the matter but the real fact is that why the abduction of the complainant was not reported to the police by the father for 8 long days. Similarly, it has been admitted by the prosecution that the other three accused who allegedly facilitated the abduction of the complainant have been found innocent. This fact makes the story of abduction to be a false. It is also not mentioned that where Mst. Shahida Bibi, complainant was confined. She has not mentioned the place, village or city from where she escaped and came back to the house of her father.
' In these circumstances, I am persuaded to consider whether it is a case of Zina-bil-Jabr or simple Zina. The allegation of Zina-bil-Jabr needs further probe and inquiry, therefore, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail, subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs .1,00,000 (One Lac) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Cited by 2 cases
- SHAFQAT ALI vs THE STATE and another 2011 YLR 1744
- MUHAMMAD ASIF alias KALA vs THE STATE 2007 P Cr. L J 1292