YLRN 2017

2017 PLP 75 (YLRN)

SHAFQAT RAMZAN alias SHAFQAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.14032-B of 2015, decided on 16th November, 2015.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Sami Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2017 PLP 75 (YLRN)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Abdul Sami Khan, J
Parties SHAFQAT RAMZAN alias SHAFQAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 PLP 75 (YLRN)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 PLP 75 (YLRN)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Sami Khan, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 PLP 75 (YLRN) (SHAFQAT RAMZAN alias SHAFQAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Liaqat Ali Malik for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.364-A

Kidnapping or abducting a person under the age of fourteen

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Delay

False implication

Delay of one day in lodging the FIR had not been explained

Allegations as to motive of abduction that were killing, ransom or satisfaction of lust, had not been supported by material/evidence

Accused, being wife of the co-accused, was not expected to facilitate her husband to abduct a child for the purpose of the commission of unnatural lust; therefore, possibility, that complainant had spread wide net to entangle the whole family of the accused

Recovery of the abductee from house of present accused was not appealable to a prudent mind

Accused, being a woman, was entitled to the concessionary relief under S.497(1), Cr.P.C.

Accused had a suckling baby of seven months at the time of her arrest

Accused was not a previous convict or involved in any criminal case

Challan of the case had already been submitted before the Court

Doubts brought the case within the purview of further inquiry

Bail application was allowed accordingly. [Paras. 2 & 3 of the judgment] Irfan Zia, Deputy Prosecutor General for the State with Muhammad Rasheed, SI with record.

Judgment & Decree

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.

Through this petition under section 497, Cr.P.C. Shafqat Ramzan petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No. 332/15, dated 02.05.2015 registered at Police Station Sadar, Sialkot in respect of an offence under section 364-A, P.P.C.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed by this Court that although the petitioner is named in the FIR yet the fact remains that there is a delay of almost one day in registration of the same which has not been explained by the complainant therein. According to the narration of the FIR the alleged abductee was abducted by the petitioner along with her co-accused for the purpose of killing him or for ransom or for satisfaction of lust but no supporting material in this regard has been brought on record of investigation to substantiate these allegations. The petitioner is wife of her co-accused namely Muhammad Jameel and it is not expected from a wife that she during existing of her matrimonial tie would facilitate her husband to abduct a child for the purpose of commission of unnatural lust with him, therefore, a possibility cannot be ruled out of consideration that the complainant has spread the net wide to entangle whole family of the petitioner in this case. It is also intriguing to point out here that the alleged abductee has allegedly been recovered from the house of the present petitioner but this fact prima facie does not appeal to a prudent mind that the petitioner would abduct a child for the above mentioned purposes and she would keep him in her own house so as to be got recovered him later on to create evidence against her. In the backdrop of such a circumstance the evidentiary worth and value of recovery effected in this case would be seen by the learned trial court at the time of trial after recording evidence in this case. The petitioner is a woman and by virtue of her gender she is also entitled for concessionary relief by this Court as enshrined under proviso to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also produced attested copy of Birth Certificate of Uzair Ali, suckling baby of the petitioner who according to the Birth Certificate was born on 11.09.2014 who was allegedly more than seven months at the time of arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner is previous non-convict, never involved in any criminal case, she is behind the bars since her arrest, i.e. 07.05.2015, investigation of this case qua her is complete, report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has already been submitted before the learned trial court on 17.05.2015, thus, no useful purpose, would be served by keeping the petitioner under incarceration.

3. For what has been discussed above the shadow of doubts are looming large in this case rendering the case against the petitioner within the purview of further inquiry into his guilt covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to her furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 200,000/- (Rupees two hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court. SL/S-12/L Petition accepted.