YLR 2021

2021 PLP 1736 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD TANVEER — Petitioner Versus The STATE and another — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore (Bahawalpur Bench)
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 77-B of 2021, decided on 19th January, 2021.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Waheed Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2021 PLP 1736 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore (Bahawalpur Bench)
Bench Members Muhammad Waheed Khan, J
Parties MUHAMMAD TANVEER — 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 2021 PLP 1736 (YLR)?

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 1736 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore (Bahawalpur Bench) bench comprising: Muhammad Waheed Khan, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2021 PLP 1736 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD TANVEER — 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

  • Malik Muhammad Aslam for Petitioner along with Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 498

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 377

Un-natural offence

Pre-arrest bail, grant of

Scope

Delayed FIR

Contradiction in ocular and medical evidence

Completion of investigation

Scope

Accused sought pre-arrest bail in an FIR registered against him wherein serious allegation of sexual assault and committing offence of sodomy was levelled against him by the mother of victim

Matter was reported to the police with delay of two days without proper explanation

Medico-legal certificate mentioned no date and time of medical examination of victim

No tears, lacerations, bruises, abrasion, swellings, hyperemia at the private parts and around the private parts were observed

No seminal material was found on the items sent to the Medical Officer

Forensic report did not verify the allegation of sodomy against the accused

Investigating Officer submitted that as the act of sodomy was not established during the course of investigation, so, the offence under S.377, P.P.C. was converted into S.377-B, P.P.C., but when he was confronted regarding the availability of any evidence in that regard, the answer was in the negative

Investigation had already been completed, meaning thereby that handing over the custody of accused to the police was neither likely to serve any useful purpose nor it seemed justified

Petition for grant of pre-arrest bail was allowed, in circumstances. Javaid Iqbal Bhaaya, ADPP for the State. Maher Ahmad Sher Kathia for the Complainant.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD WAHEED KHAN, J.

Apprehending his arrest at the hands of the local police, petitioner Muhammad Tanveer through this petition seeks pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.365/2020 dated 25.09.2020 registered under section 377, P.P.C. at Police Station City Ahmedpur East, Bahawalpur.

2. The petitioner was booked in the instant crime report with an allegation that on 23.09,2020 in the area of Mauza Wahid Qadir Deena situated within the territorial limits of Police Station City Ahmad Pur East, Bahawalpur, he committed sodomy with one Shehzad, 7, son of the complainant and on the intervention of the PWs, he managed to run away, hence, the instant FIR.

3. After having dilated upon the facts, in the light of arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the record, I found that a very serious allegation of sexual assault and committing offence of sodomy has been levelled against the petitioner by the mother of the victim, namely, Salma Bibi in the occurrence, which allegedly took place on 23.09.2020 at 02:00 p.m., whereas the matter was reported to the police with un-plausible delay of two days on 25.09.2020. However, the victim was medically examined in THQ Hospital, Ahmedpur East and a medico-legal certificate was issued, perusal of which reveals that no date and time of medical examination of the victim has been mentioned therein. Anyhow, no tears, lacerations, bruises, abrasion, swellings, hyperemia at the private parts and around the private parts were observed. Even in the column of evidence of bleeding/staining with blood and in column of evidence of seminal stain, the medical officer has written as "Nill". However, the Shalwar/qameez, allegedly worn by the victim at the time of incident and one internal and two external swabs were taken and sent to Punjab Forensic Science Agency (PFSA) to determine the fact whether the victim was subjected to sodomy or otherwise. The report submitted by the Punjab Forensic Science Agency to the investigating officer disclosed that no seminal material was found on the item sent to it by the medical officer, therefore, no further DNA (Short Tandem Repeat profiling) was conducted on these items, meaning thereby that the forensic report also did not verify the allegation of sodomy against the petitioner. The learned law officer on the instructions imparted by the investigating officer present in Court submits that as the act of sodomy has not been established during the course of investigation, so, the offence under section 377, P.P.C. has been converted into section 377-B, P.P.C., but when he was confronted regarding the availability of any evidence in this regard, the answer is in the negative. Even otherwise, it is apprised to the Court that the investigation has already been completed, meaning thereby that handing over the custody or the petitioner to the police is neither likely to serve my useful purpose nor it seems justified.

4. All these factors, discussed supra lead to the conclusion that the involvement of the petitioner on the basis of mala fide on part of the complainant cannot be ignored, hence, this petition is allowed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioner is confirmed, subject to his furnishing fresh surety bond in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lacs) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. SA/M-39/L Bail grante