RASHAD vs THE STATE
This petition for leave to appeal was filed against an order of the Lahore High Court dismissing the petitioner's application for bail in a case involving an allegation of Zina-bil-Jabr. The petitioner argued that the case warranted further inquiry due to the incident being unwitnessed and a significant delay of six to seven days in lodging the First Information Report. The Supreme Court examined the contentions and the impugned order, finding no legal defect or illegality in the High Court's refusal of bail. The Court observed that a direct allegation of Zina had been made against the petitioner. Emphasizing the heinous nature of the offence, the Court held that the petitioner was not entitled to the concession of bail. Consequently, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's order, maintained the refusal of bail, and directed that the trial be concluded expeditiously. The petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.
- Does a delay of several days in lodging an FIR for Zina-bil-Jabr automatically entitle an accused to bail?
- Is an accused entitled to bail when there is a direct allegation of a heinous offence like Zina-bil-Jabr?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with a High Court order refusing bail if the order contains no legal defect or illegality?
- Section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order, dated 13-3- 2002 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Criminal Miscellaneous No,1375-B of 2002 filed by the petitioner for bail was dismissed.
2. The brief facts of the case are that a F.I.R. Was lodged by the complainant Shamshad Akhtar wherein she stated that on the night between 10/11-12-2000 at 3-30 a.m. Sehri time, she had gone outside of her house in the fields to ease herself. Meanwhile, the petitioner Rashad appeared there with revolver and threatened her to remain silent who dragged her to his Baithak and committed Zinal-bil-Jabr with her. On release, she came out and raised hue and cry which attracted her father Muhammad Amin and P.W. Muhammad Aslam to whom she narrated the entire incident. They tried to catch hold of the petitioner but he succeeded in decamping whereupon a case under section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) was got registered against Rashad petitioner on 18-12-2000 at Police Station Lundianwala, District Faisalabad.
3. Mr. Mahmood A. Qureshi, learned Advocate-on-Record for the petitioner mainly contended that not only the incident is unseen one, but also there is unexplained delay of 6/7 days in lodging of F.I.R., which facts make the case of the petitioner to be of further inquiry.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the impugned order which does not suffer from any defect or illegality. The directions to conclude the trial expeditiously have already been issued by the Lahore High Court, as such we do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order which is accordingly maintained. Moreover, a direct allegation of committing Zina has been levelled against the petitioner. The offence being heinous in nature, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.
Cited by 2 cases
- Aziz-Ur-Rehman alias Babul vs The State 2022 PCRLJ 828
- USMAN KHAN Versus Mst. NASREEN 2021 MLD 1833