MLD 2021

2021 PLP 1332 (MLD)

AQIB SALEEM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2021-March-4
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2021 PLP 1332 (MLD)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties AQIB SALEEM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — 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 2021 PLP 1332 (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 2021 PLP 1332 (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: 2021 PLP 1332 (MLD) (AQIB SALEEM — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Nisar Mehboob Tiwana for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.377

Unnatural offences

Bail, grant of

Scope

Accused was alleged to have committed sodomy with the son of complainant

No injury sign around anal nor marks of violence were observed by doctor on the body of the victim

Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA) test report of the victim was in the negative

Accused was not involved in any other case of such like nature and was not required by the police for the purpose of investigation

Case of accused called for further inquiry within the ambit of subsection (2) of S.497, Cr.P.C.

Petition for grant of bail was allowed, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

SHEHRAM SARWAR CH., J.

Aqib Saleem, petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No.32 dated 29.01.2020, offence under Section 377, P.P.C., registered at Police Station Bhalwal Saddar District Sargodha.

2. Precisely, the allegation against the petitioner is that he Committed sodomy with Muhammad Hanan Farooq son of the complainant.

3. Heard.

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner. as well as learned Law Officer and perusing the available record with their assistance it has been noted by me that according to the doctor, there was no injury sign around anal or in anal canal. No marks of violence have been observed by the doctor on the body of the victim. The DNA test report of the victim is in the negative. As apprised by learned Law Officer, petitioner is not involved in any other case of such like nature. The petitioner is behind the bars since 22.12.2020 and no more required by the police for the purpose of investigation.

5. For the foregoing reasons, the case of petitioner calls for further inquiry within the ambit of subsection (2) of Section 497, Cr.P.C. Therefore, while relying upon case law titled as "Muhammad Nauman Hanif v. The State and another" (2016 SCMR 1399) and "Mohsin v. The State and others" (2017 SCMR 290) this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.

6. Before parting with this order, it is clarified that the observations made in this order are tentative in nature and relevant only for the disposal of this bail petition which shall not influence the learned trial court in any manner, whatsoever. SA/A-35/L Bail granted.