2012 PLP 810 (MLD)
ALAMGIR alias GULLA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2012 PLP 810 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ALAMGIR alias GULLA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 810 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 810 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 810 (MLD) (ALAMGIR alias GULLA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Saleemullah Khan Ranazai for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.376
Report having been lodged after 4/5 months of the occurrence, probability of false involvement of accused in the case, could not be ruled out
Application on behalf of accused moved for DNA test of the complainant, was resisted by the prosecution, which made the case of accused of further inquiry
Keeping in view the circumstances of the case, except the allegation of the complainant, nothing was on record which reasonably connected the accused with the commission of offence
Judgment & Decree
KHALID MEHMOOD KHAN, J.
Petitioner, namely, Alamgir alias Gulla son of Abdur Rahim, having failed to secure his release on bail in the lower Courts, have approached this Court for seeking the same relief.
2. Short facts of the instant case are that the accused/petitioner was charged in case F.I.R. No.145 dated 21-7-2011 registered under section 376, P.P.C. Police Station, Daraban Kalan District D.I. Khan. In the F.I.R. the accused/petitioner was charged by the complainant for committing Zina-bil-Jabar with her.
3. Learned counsel for the accused/petitioner contended that the report has been lodged by the complainant after 4/5 months of the occurrence which is based on mala fide and to pressurize the accused/petitioner to contract marriage with her. He argued that there is no circumstantial or any other corroborative evidence against the accused/petitioner to connect him with commission of offence. He also referred to an application moved by the accused/petitioner to S.P Investigation, D.I. Khan for DNA test of the complainant which has not been exceeded and the prosecution intentionally avoiding from the DNA test which support the version of accused/petitioner. He further submitted that it is a case of further inquiry and accused/petitioner is entitled to the concession of bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for complainant argued that the accused/petitioner is directly charged in the F.I.R. for committing Zina-bil-Jabar and in such like cases no other witnesses are available. He contended that the delay in such like cases in our area is a natural because due to dignity and honour no one used to lodge report promptly, therefore, accused/petitioner is not entitled to concession of bail.
5. Arguments heard and record perused.
6. Perusal of record reveals that the report has been lodged after 4/5 months of the occurrence and the probability of false involvement of the accused/petitioner in the present case cannot be ruled out specially when the application on behalf of accused/petitioner moved for the DNA test of the complainant which was resisted by the prosecution, which makes the case of accused/petitioner is of further inquiry. Keeping in view the circumstances of the present case except the allegations of the complainant there is nothing on record which reasonably connects the accused/petitioner with the commission of offence.
7. In the light of the above circumstances, the accused/petitioner is allowed to be released on bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (two lac) with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Illaqa/Duty Magistrate, D.I. Khan. The sureties must be local, reliable and men of means. H.B.T./308/P Bail granted.