GULZAR alias GULZAR AHMED vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a bail application filed by the accused, Gulzar alias Gulzar Ahmed, who was charged under Sections 354-A, 337-A(i), 504, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 in connection with an F.I.R. registered at Police Station Mehar. The core legal question was whether the accused was entitled to post-arrest bail given the nature of the allegations, which involved an alleged attempt to strip a lady and the infliction of simple injuries upon her husband. The court examined the applicability of Section 354-A, noting that the lady was not exposed to public view, and considered whether the offense might more appropriately fall under Section 354, which carries a lesser punishment of two years. Observing that the injuries caused were simple and that the statutory punishment for the potential offense was not of a prohibitive nature, the court held that the accused was entitled to the concession of bail. The court granted bail subject to the furnishing of a surety bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000, emphasizing the non-prohibitive nature of the alleged offenses.
- Whether an accused charged under Section 354-A of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 is entitled to bail when the victim was not exposed to public view?
- Does the infliction of simple injuries in an alleged attempt to outrage a woman's modesty warrant the denial of bail?
- Is an offense punishable by two years imprisonment considered a non-prohibitive offense for the purpose of granting bail?
- Section 354-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 504, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 354, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' The F.I.R. Has been registered against the accused under sections 354-A, 337-A(i), 504, 34, P.P.C. In connection with Crime No,100 of 2002 at Police Station Mehar. Apparently the case is of attempt of Zina and plain reading of the F.I.R. Shows that the accused tried to open Nara, but on her cries family members rushed to across and the co-accused after inflicting simple injury on the husband of the lady, ran away. Learned counsel for the accused has relied upon the case of Muhammad Ajmal alias Teddy v. State reported in 1994 PCr.LJ 132 where in a similar situation an attempt to strip the lady was made and the injury being simple bail was granted.
2. ' Counsel appearing for the State however, points out that the case was not of section 354-A, as the lady was not exposed to public view after striping her. According to him, the case would fall under section 354 as it could be safely assumed that it was the intention of the party to outrage the modesty of the lady. In a case registered under section 354, P.P.C. The punishment is only two years. The other sections used in this case 337-A(i), 504, 34, P.P.C. Which has been attributed to the co-accused, show that simple injury has been caused to the husband of the lady.
3. ' Under the circumstances, bail is granted to the applicant in the sum of Rs,50,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount, to the satisfaction ofl the trial Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 1 case
- WAHID BUX And Another vs THE STATE 2011 YLR 212