Mst. SAKINA BIBI vs THE STATE
This post-arrest bail application was filed on behalf of the petitioner, Mst. Sakina Bibi, in a case arising out of FIR No. 146 of 2001, registered under Sections 10, 13, 14, and 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 at Police Station Nankana Sahib, Sheikhupura. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was running a brothel house and had supplied a female co-accused to a male co-accused for the commission of Zina, though the petitioner allegedly escaped during the police raid. The legal issue before the Lahore High Court was whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail. The High Court accepted the petition and admitted the petitioner to bail. The Court held that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot, co-accused persons had already been granted bail, the petitioner was a female entitled to concession on that ground, and her case called for further enquiry, making continued detention in judicial lock-up unjustified.
- Whether an accused who was not apprehended at the spot and whose co-accused have already been granted bail is entitled to post-arrest bail on the ground of further enquiry?
- Whether a female accused charged under the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 is entitled to the concession of bail on account of her gender?
- Can an accused be retained in judicial lock-up indefinitely when the case against them requires further enquiry?
- Section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 13, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 14, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 18, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
' This application for bail after arrest has been filed on behalf of Mst. Sakeena Bibi who is involved in a case arising out of F.I.R. No,146 of 2001, registered on 14-12-2001 in Police Station Nankana Sahib, District Sheikhupura under sections 10/13/14/18 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood)
Ordinance (VII of 1979).
2. The F.I.R. Was lodged by one Nazar Hussain, A.S.-I. Of Police Station Nankana Sahib City, stating therein that on the receipt of an information that Mst. Sakina Bibi was running a brothel house in Mohallah Rehmania and that a girl was present in her house, Rasheed Ahmed, Rana Ali Muhammad Liaqat Ali and Shaukat Ali were deputed by him to keep a watch on the house of Mst.
Sakina Bibi. Rasheed Ahmed later informed him that a boy and girl were present in the Baithak of Mst. Sakina Bibi with the intention of committing Zina and could be apprehended if a raid was arranged. On the receipt of this information, the complainant alongwith the informant and other P.Ws. Conducted a raid and opened the door of the Baithak and saw that the boy present therein was trying to commit Zina with the girl. Both of them were apprehended and they disclosed their names as Muhammad Arshad and Mst. Seeman alias Naheed while Mst. Sakina Bibi petitioner managed to escape from the spot. Muhammad Arshad disclosed that he had hired the said girl for the purpose of Zina from Mst. Sakina Bibi, for an amount of Rs,1,000. Hence the case as aforesaid was registered.
3. Arguments have been heard and record perused.
4. Admittedly Mst. Sakina Bibi had not been apprehended at the spot as she had allegedly managed to escape. It has been pointed out that both Mst. Seeman and Muhammad Arshad have already been admitted to bail. It has also been argued that the petitioner, being a woman is also entitled to the concession of bail on the said ground as well. Even otherwise, the case of the petitioner is clearly one of further enquiry. No useful purpose can be served by keeping the petitioner in the judicial lock-up for an indefinite period.
4-A. Under the circumstances, the petition is accepted and Mst. Sakina Bibi petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.