MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL vs THE STATE
This criminal petition arises out of a bail application filed by Muhammad Muzammal facing allegations of abduction and Zina. The core legal question revolves around whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail in light of an unexplained eight-month delay in lodging the First Information Report, pending civil litigation regarding marriage, and a police inquiry report declaring the case false. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and granted post-arrest bail to the petitioner. The Court held that the substantial delay in reporting the crime, coupled with the pending family suits and a favorable police case diary finding the accusation false, brought the matter within the scope of further inquiry under subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, making the petitioner a fit case for the grant of bail.
- Does an eight-month delay in lodging the FIR create sufficient doubt to warrant post-arrest bail?
- Whether pending family and matrimonial suits between the parties are relevant considerations in a bail application for criminal charges?
- Can a police case diary finding a case to be false serve as a ground for granting bail under section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Case was registered on the statement of Nabila Kausar the alleged product in this case on 30-10- 2000 while the occurrence had taken place on 12-2-2000. According to the statement of Nabila Kausar, the victim in this case, she was present at bus stop on 12-2-2000. In order to go to college, a white colour car came there in which Muzammal (present petitioner), Maqboolan Bibi and Ishrat Bibi were present. Maqboolan Bibi and Irshat Bibi forcibly boarded her, Muzammal drove the car and threatened her to keep quiet, thereafter, Muzammal took.Her in the house of Muhammad Boota at Nasirabad and confined her in the house of Boota, for there 34 days, Muzammal had been committing Zina with her, thereafter, Muzammal and Salamat took her in the office of an Advocate, in the area of Lahore Cann obtained the signature of complainant on 'Nikah Nama and Stamp Paper forcibly. On the next day, present petitioner took her to Chak No,452/GB, where father of present petitioner told her that she cannot go anywhere. On 28-2-2000, maternal uncle of complainant Khalid Pervez, Muhammad Saeed, maternal grandmother Sitara Bibi and Rana Khalil reached the house of Muzammal and took the complainant with them.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a delay of 8 months in lodging the F.I.R..
That Nabila Kausar, the complainant/victim is paternal cousin of the petitioner, that they entered into nikah according to their own freewill, that suit for restitution of conjugal right and jactitation of marriage are also pending before the concerned Court, that present case has been found false by Abdul Razzaq A.S.I. Vide his Zimnee dated 20-9-2001.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R., offence falls within the ambit of section 497(1), Cr.P.C, and he is not entitled for the grant of bail.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. According to the prosecution case, Mst. Nabila Kausar went to her house on 28-2-2000 but till 30-10-2000 no case was registered either on her statement or on the statement of her father, this delay of eight months creates doubt in the prosecution case. Moreover, suit for restitution of Marriage and restitution of conjugal rights are also pending between the parties. I have also myself gone through the case diary date 20-9-2001 which has been incorporated by Abdul Razzaq A.S.I. According to his findings, the case was found to be false.
5. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through the case diary mentioned above I am fully satisfied that this is a case which is covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, this petition is accepted. Petitioner is allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs,30,000 (thirty thousand) with one surety in the like-amount to the satisfaction of trial Court.