ABDUL GHAFFAR alias PHARI vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 177 dated 26-10-2001 registered under section 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 read with section 354 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Fateh Shah, District Vehari. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to post-arrest bail considering the delay in lodging the F.I.R., the medical report showing no injuries, and the police finding that an offence under section 354 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 was made out instead of section 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979. The Lahore High Court held that the delay of six days in lodging the F.I.R. and the absence of injuries on the victim despite allegations of beating made out a case for further inquiry under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court admitted the petitioner to post-arrest bail subject to furnishing surety bonds, laying down the principle that unexplained delay in registration of the F.I.R. coupled with lack of corroborative medical evidence with regard to physical violence warrants the grant of bail pending trial.
- Does a delay of six days in lodging the F.I.R. and the absence of injuries in the medical report make out a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted when the police report recommends challan under a lesser offence than charged in the F.I.R.?
- Section 10(2), Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 354, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' The petitioner seeks bail in case F.I.R,. No,177 dated 26-10-2001 under section 10(2) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No,VII of 1979 read with section 354, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Fateh Shah, District Vehari.
2. Brief facts of the case as given in the F.I.R. Are that the complainant on 20-10-2001 at about 4/5- 00 p.m. Was cutting grass for her animals. Suddenly, the petitioner armed with pistol came there and dragged her to a nearby water Khal. The complainant started raising alarm. However, the petitioner gave him blows with his fists and pistol butt. He also broke her string of her Shalwar and started committing Zina with her. On hue and cry of the complainant, the -witnesses were attracted there. Whereupon, the petitioner ran away with Iris weapon and consequently when the husband of the' petitioner came back, the instant case was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that there is a delay of six days in registering of the case; that the medical examination was also conducted on 26-102001 i,e, Six days after the occurrence. According to the medical report, there is no injury on the person of the victim; that the Investigating Officer has found that an offence under section 354, P.P.C. Was made out and the challan was submitted under the same offence. It is finally argued that the instant case has been registered falsely against the petitioner because the complainant was cutting grass unauthorisedly from the fields of the petitioner. She was stopped and due to this grudge this false case stands registered.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this bail application. It is contended that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. And specific role is attributed to him; that there is no reason for falsely implicating the petitioner in the case.
5. In the earlier part of the day, when the case was called a police officer with record was present.
However; now the case is repeatedly called. Nobody has turned up with record.
6. In view of the fact that the victim was medically examined after six days and no injury was found on her person, despite she was allegedly given beating by the petitioner with the butt of the pistol and fists and also delay in lodging the F.I.R. Makes out a case of further inquiry. The police has also recommended that an offence under section 354, P.P.C. Has made out. It will be seen by the learned trial Court whether a case under section 10(2) of Offence of Zina is made out or under section 354, -P.P.C. However, in the circumstances of the case, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.