MANAZAR BIBI alias BOBI and another vs STATE
This is an application for post-arrest bail filed on behalf of two female petitioners, Manazar Bibi alias Bobi and Nazia Bibi, who were implicated along with their father in a criminal case registered under Sections 302, 452, and 337A(i) read with Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 at Police Station Chub Kalan, District Khanewal. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners are entitled to bail considering their specific roles attributed in the First Information Report, subsequent improvements made through a supplementary statement, and their status as females, including one with a suckling infant. The Lahore High Court held that since one petitioner did not cause any injury and the other's attribution to the deceased arose only via a supplementary statement after post-mortem, coupled with their gender and the presence of a suckling baby, the case called for further inquiry. The court laid down the principle that tentative assessment of evidence at the bail stage favoring female accused with minimal or doubtful active attribution warrants the grant of post-arrest bail.
- Are female accused entitled to post-arrest bail when the primary injury to the deceased is attributed to a co-accused and their own role appears doubtful?
- Does an improvement made in a supplementary statement after post-mortem examination create a case for further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Whether the presence of a suckling baby is a relevant mitigating factor while considering bail for female petitioners?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
This is an application for bail after arrest moved on behalf of Manazar Bibi alias Bobi and Nazia Bibi who are involved alongwith their father Khadim Hussain in a case under Sections 302, 452, 337A(i) read with Section 34 PPC registered at Police Station Chub Kalan, District Khanewal on 27.7.2003.
The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27.7.2003 at about 9 p.m. Khadim Hussain accompanied by his two daughters, the present petitioners, entered the court-yard of the house of Raees Ahmad, complainant, Khadim Hussain was armed with a toka, while, Nazia Bibi and Manazar Bibi were carrying Chhuri and Sota, respectively. Khadim Hussain attempted to give a toka blow to Muhammad Hussain but unfortunately it hit Mst. Amiran on her left arm. Mst. Manazar Bibi clasped Muhammad Hussain P.W. and Mst. Nazia allegedly gave a chhuri blow to Mst. Nasim Bibi P.W. causing an injury on her cheek.
3. The motive for the offence, as per FIR, is that shortly before the occurrence Muhammad Hussain, P.W. had chopped of few branches of date palm three and brought to his house. After the postmortem examination, the police recorded the supplementary statement of the complainant in which he deposed that Nazia Bibi had also given a chhuri blow to Mst. Amiran Bibi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that as per FIR, both the petitioners did not cause any injury to the deceased and the improvement made by the prosecution by way of recording the supplementary statement of the complainant after the postmortem examination makes the prosecution story doubtful.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the release of the petitioner. He argued that the petitioners have actively participated in the occurrence and after the commencement of the trial, it would not be proper to release them on bail.
6. I have considered the arguments and have perused the record. Mst. Manazar Bibi has not caused any injury to any person. Similarly, Mst. Nazia as per FIR had also not caused any injury to Mst. Amiran-deceased. Both are females. Mst. Nazia Bibi has also a suckling baby with her. I, therefore, feel inclined to accept this petition and order the release of both the petitioners on bail subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rupees One Hundred Thousand, each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.