Pakistan Case Law
2004 P C R L J 282

Mst. GHULAM FATIMA vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2004 P C R L J 282
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No,4597/B of 2002
Date2002-07-19
Judge(s)Asif Saeed Khan Khosa
ResultBail granted
Summary

Through this petition, the petitioner Mst. Ghulam Fatima sought post-arrest bail in respect of F.I.R. No. 184 registered on 4-10-2001 at Police Station City Jhang for offences under sections 302, 324, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The core legal question revolved around whether the petitioner was entitled to the concession of post-arrest bail considering the delay in lodging the F.I.R., the nature of the role attributed to her involving a Lalkara and a simple Sota blow, her status as a woman, and whether her case called for further inquiry into her guilt. The Lahore High Court held that the case warranted further inquiry under subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and also attracted the beneficial provisions of the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 for female accused persons. Consequently, the petition was allowed and the petitioner was admitted to post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that bail ought not to be withheld by way of premature punishment, and female accused persons whose cases fall under the statutory exceptions or require further probe regarding vicarious liability should be granted bail.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether a female accused is entitled to the concession of bail under the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 irrespective of the gravity of the offence?
  • Does a role of raising a Lalkara and causing a simple blow without attributing a fatal injury to the deceased call for further inquiry into the guilt of the accused under subsection (2) of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
  • Can bail be withheld by way of premature punishment when the challan has been submitted and continued custody serves no beneficial purpose?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 497(1), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
  • Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
post-arrest bailvicarious liabilityfurther inquirywoman bail concessiondelayed FIRcommon objectpremature punishment

ORDER

Through this petition Mst. Ghulam Fatima petitioner has sought post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No,184 registered at Police Station City Jhang on 4-10-2001 for offences under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed that the F.I.R. In this case had been lodged with noticeable delay. According to the F.I.R. The petitioner had not caused any injury to Muhammad Amir deceased and the petitioner stands saddled with the responsibility of raising a Lalkara and then causing a Sota blow on the back of.

Chest of Jaffar complainant. In these circumstances the question of sharing of common object by the petitioner with his co-accused vis-a-vis the alleged murder as also the question regarding vicarious liability of the petitioner for the offences allegedly committed by her co-accused call for further probe at the time of the trial. The petitioner is a woman and her case attracts the provisions of the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Which provisions envisages a concession of bail for accused persons irrespective of gravity of the offence allegedly committed by them. The challan in this case has already been submitted after completion of investigation and, thus, continued custody of the petitioner in jail is not likely to serve any beneficial purpose at this stage. It is trite that the concession of bail ought not to be withheld by way of premature punishment.

3. For what has been discussed above the case against the petitioner calls for further inquiry into her guilt within the purview of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Besides attracting the provisions of the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail Bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.