PCRLJN 2020

2020 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD AFZAL and 2 others — Appellants Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2019-September-3
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2020 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties MUHAMMAD AFZAL and 2 others — Appellants 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 2020 P Cr (PLP)?

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 P Cr (PLP)?

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 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD AFZAL and 2 others — Appellants 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

  • Agha Abu ul Hassan Arif for Petitioners.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 365-B

Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage

Bail, grant of

Delayed FIR

Statement of abductee, favouring the accused party

Further inquiry

Scope

Accused persons were alleged to have abducted the daughter of complainant with intent to commit zina

Crime report was lodged with a delay of fourteen days for which no plausible explanation was rendered by the prosecution

Accused persons were real brothers of co-accused with whom the alleged abductee had entered into bond of marriage

Alleged abductee had filed a private complaint under Ss. 452, 354 & 506, P.P.C. before the Illaqa Magistrate, wherein she had got recorded statement favouring the accused party

Alleged abductee had stated in categorical terms before the High Court that she being sui juris had entered into bond of marriage with the co-accused, brother of accused persons, with her free will and consent

Investigating officer had verified that nikahnama was genuine

Case against accused persons was one of further inquiry falling within the ambit of S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.

Accused persons were behind bars since the date of their arrest and investigation being complete, they were not required by the police for further investigation

Petition for grant of post-arrest bail was accepted, in circumstances. [Paras. 6 & 7 of the judgment]

Judgment & Decree

SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.

By means of instant petition, Muhammad Afzal, Muhammad Sultan and Muhammad Imran (petitioners) seek post-arrest bail in case FIR No.500, dated 06.07.2019, offence under section 365-B, P.P.C., registered with Police Station, Sadar Jaranwala, District Faisalabad.

2. Allegation against the petitioners, in brief as per contents of the crime report is that in between the night of 21/22.06.2019 at 10:00 p.m. they along with their co-accused abducted daughter of the complainant namely Kashifa with intent to commit zina with her.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners have falsely been involved in this case by the complainant against the actual facts and circumstances with ulterior motives. It is argued that there is delay of fourteen days in lodging the crime report for which no explanation has been rendered by the prosecution. As a matter of fact, it is contended that the petitioners have been roped in this case by the complainant just being real brothers of Muhammad Ashfaq, co-accused, with whom the alleged abductee has entered into bond of marriage with her free will and consent and she also filed private complaint under sections 452, 506, 354, P.P.C., in this regard before the learned Illaqa Magistrate, wherein she has got recorded statement favouring the accused party. Such circumstances, it is contended make the case against the petitioners one of further inquiry falling within the ambit of section 497(2), Cr.P.C. In such backdrop, it is argued that the petitioners are.entitled to the relief prayed for by means of instant petition.

4. As against above, learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this petition with vehemence. It is argued that the petitioners are named in the FIR with specific allegation. Adds that the PWs have fully implicated the petitioners in this case through their statements recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. In such backdrop, it is submitted that the petitioners are not entitled to the relief prayed for.

5. Arguments advanced pro and contra have been heard. I have also gone through the record available on file.

6. Though the petitioners are named in the crime report, however this Court has to see from the facts and circumstances whether case against the petitioners to the extent of grant of relief prayed for is made out or not. There is delay of fourteen days in lodging the crime report for which no plausible explanation has been rendered by the prosecution. Undeniably all the three petitioners are real brothers of Muhammad Ashfaq, co-accused, with whom the alleged abductee has entered into bond of marriage on 19.06.2019. She also filed private complaint under sections 452, 506, 354, P.P.C., in this regard before the learned Illaqa Magistrate, wherein she has got recorded statement favouring the accused party. Moreover, in pursuance of order dated 27.08.2019, Mst. Kashifa (the alleged abductee) has been produced before this Court from dar-ul-aman. When confronted, she states in categorical terms that she being sui juris has entered into bond of marriage with Muhammad Ashfaq, brother of the petitioners, with her free will and consent. The Investigating Officer present before the Court also states that during the course of investigation, the nikahnama has been found genuine. In such circumstances the case against the petitioners becomes one of further inquiry falling within the ambit of section. 497(2), Cr.P.C. The petitioners are behind the bars since the date of their arrest and investigation being complete, they are no more required by the police for further investigation and as such no useful purpose would be served by their further detention in jail.

7. For the foregoing facts and circumstances, this Court is persuaded to accept this petition. Resultantly, the instant petition is accepted and the petitioners are admitted to bail after arrest subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court. The alleged abductee namely Kashifa, who was lodged in dar-ul-aman, Lahore by this Court vide order dated 27.08.2015 present before the Court is set at liberty. SA/M-194/L Bail granted.