MLD 2007

2007 PLP 592 (MLD)

BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2006-May-5
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2007 PLP 592 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
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 2007 PLP 592 (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 2007 PLP 592 (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: 2007 PLP 592 (MLD) (BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Muhammad Ishaq Dogar for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.377

Bail, refusal of

Contents of F.I.R. revealed that victim was about 8/9 years of age, but perusal of medico-legal report had shown that minor (victim) was about 7 years

Prima facie evidence had been collected due to abrasions on the body of the victim and medical evidence supported allegation levelled against accused

Even otherwise, there was no reason for the complainant to falsely implicate accused in offence of sodomy committed with his minor brother

Challan in the case had been prepared and sent up to the Court

Accused, in circumstances had not been able to make out a case of further inquiry as sufficient grounds were available to connect him with the commission of offence which was punishable for more than 10 years imprisonment

Case being not fit for grant of bail, bail petition of accused was dismissed.

Judgment & Decree

IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.

Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. Bashir Ahmad (petitioner) seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No. 116-2005, dated 15-3-2005, registered under section 377, P.P.C. at Police Station, Satiana, District Faisalabad on the application of Zohra Khan, the complainant.

2. The brief allegation against the petitioner as alleged in F.I.R. is that on 23-12-2004 he had committed sodomy with Sohail Afzal aged about 8/9 years, brother of the complainant and the occurrence was witnessed by Nafar Ali and Zubair P.Ws.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is involved in this case due to enmity and challan has not been submitted in the Court; that report shows that incident had taken place 6/7 days prior to the registration of case, hence it is an afterthought story.

4. The learned counsel for the State has opposed this bail petition on the ground that the petitioner had committed heinous offence, which falls within the ambit of prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C.

5. I have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due care and caution.

6. According to the contents of F.I.R. the victim is about 8/9 years of age, but perusal of Medico-legal report shows that the minor (victim) is about 7 years and prima facie evidence has been collected due to abrasions on the body of the victim and medical evidence supports the allegation levelled against the petitioner. Even otherwise, there is no reason for the complainant to falsely implicate the petitioner in the present case in such heinous offence of sodomy committed with his minor brother. According to the Investigating Officer, challan has been prepared and sent up to the Court. In the above circumstances, I find that the petitioner has not been able to make out a case of further inquiry, as there are sufficient grounds to connect the petitioner with the commission of offence, which is punishable more than 10 years imprisonment. Hence, I do not find a fit case for the grant of bail and resultantly the instant bail petition is dismissed. H.B.T./B-29/L Bail refused.