2020 PLP 155 (MLD)
DILAWAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2020 PLP 155 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DILAWAR — 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 2020 PLP 155 (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 2020 PLP 155 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 PLP 155 (MLD) (DILAWAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Akhtar Hussain Bhatti for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 365-B, 376 & 375
Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage, rape
Scope
Allegation against accused was that he along with another abducted the daughter of complainant on gun point and both accused persons committed rape with her
Accused was named in the FIR with specific role
Allegation against accused was prima facie supported by the medical evidence, according to which the hymen of the alleged victim was old torn
Medical examination of alleged victim was conducted after 10 days of abduction
Forensic Science Agency had reported that no semen was detected on the swabs taken from the vaginal area of the victim and after going through the said report medical officer had opined that no fresh intercourse was taken place but the alleged victim was abducted on 21-11-2018 and she was released from the custody of the accused on 26-11-2018, whereas her medical examination was conducted on 01-12-2018, therefore, non-presence of semen on the swabs taken from the vagina of alleged victim was quite natural
Penetration was sufficient to constitute the offence of rape
Penetration was established from the medico-legal report of the alleged victim
Accused was found guilty during the course of investigation and accused was unable to establish any mala fide on the part of the prosecution for his false involvement in the case
Co-accused had been granted post arrest bail by High Court but no allegation of rape was levelled against him and as such the case of the accused was distinguishable from the case of the co-accused
Accused, in circumstances, could not claim the relief of bail on the principle of consistency
Petition of accused for grant of bail was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
MALIK SHAHZAD AHMAD KHAN, J.
Through the instant petition, the petitioner Dilawar seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No.893/2018, dated 28.11.2018, offences under sections 365-B/376, P.P.C., registered at police station Factory Area, District Faisalabad.
2. Arguments heard. Record perused.
3. As per brief allegations levelled in the FIR, on 21.11.2018, at about 6.00 p.m, the daughter of the complainant namely Mst. Zohara Bibi, was coming back towards her house but she was abducted at gun point by the petitioner and his co-accused, who took her to an unknown place, where the petitioner and Shahzaib co-accused committed rape with her turn by turn. On 26.11.2018, Mst. Saima Bibi co-accused took Mst. Zohara Bibi alleged victim to her house, where the alleged victim namely Mst. Zohara Bibi raised hue and cry, upon which the people of the Mohallah attracted towards the spot and rescued Mst. Zohara Bibi, hence the abovementioned FIR.
4. The petitioner is named in the FIR with the specific role that he along with his co-accused abducted Mst. Zohara Bibi and took her to an unknown placed, where he and Shahzaib co-accused committed rape with her turn by turn. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is prima facie supported by the medical evidence, according to which the hymen of the alleged victim was old torn. It is noteworthy that Mst. Zohara Bibi was abducted on 21.11.2018 and her medical examination was conducted on 01.12.2018. Although as per report of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore, no semens were detected on the swabs taken from the vaginal area of the victim and after going through the said report, the Medical Officer has opined that no fresh intercourse has taken place in this case but it is noteworthy that Mst. Zohara Bibi was abducted on 21.11.2018 and she was released from the custody of the accused on 26.11.2018, whereas her medical examination was conducted on 01.12.2018, therefore, non-presence of semens on the swabs taken from her vaginal area was quite natural. Moreover, under section 375, P.P.C., only penetration is sufficient to constitute the offence of rape. The penetration in this case is established from the medico legal report of Mst. Zohara Bibi alleged victim, according to which her hymen was old torn. The petitioner has been found guilty during the course of investigation. The petitioner is unable to establish any mala fide on the part of the prosecution for his false involvement in this case. It is true that the co-accused of the petitioner namely Iftikhar alias Babloo has been granted post arrest bail by this Court vide order dated 07.02.2018, passed in Crl. Misc. No.1314-B of 2019 but no allegation of rape was levelled against the abovementioned co-accused and as such case of the petitioner is distinguishable from the case of the abovementioned co-accused, therefore, the petitioner cannot claim the relief of bail on the principle of consistency.
5. Keeping in view all the aforementioned facts, there is no substance in the present petition, hence the same is hereby dismissed. SA/D-8/L Bail declined.