PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Lahore) 723
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)--
----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 376 & 511--Bail grant of--Allegation of attempt to commit zina--FIR delayed--Victim is minor girl aged 8 years--Improvements in statement u/S. 164, Cr.P.C. to the extent of Rs. 50/- by the petitioner and then coming of the both parents at home and only taking off the clothes are improvements which are significant even at bail state--Undoubtedly, no second investigation was ordered therefore, it is final opinion of police--Where investigation officer investigated matter at length and found the accused innocent, bail was granted--Petitioner has spent sufficient time behind bars--Post arrest bail was allowed. [P. 724] A
Mian Arshad Ali Mahar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Miss Umm-ul-Baneen, DDPP for State.
Malik Tariq Yaseen Nonari, Advocate for Complainant/ Respondent No. 2.
Date of hearing: 4.3.2021.
PLJ 2021 Cr.C. (Lahore) 723
Present: Ali Baqar Najafi, J.
MUHAMMAD AYOUB--Petitioner
versus
STATE etc.--Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. 8424 of 2021, decided on 4.3.2021.
Judgment
The petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR No. 920/2020 dated 18.10.2020 under Sections 376, 511, PPC registered at Police Station Haveli Lakha, Tehsil Depalpur, District Okara on the allegation that on 09.10.2020 at 4/5:00 p.m. the complainant along with his wife had gone in the Haveli Bazar for shopping whereas his daughter, namely, Mst. Umm-e-Aymon aged 8 years was at home; when the complainant came back the door was closed and when he knocked at the door he heard the hue and cry of his daughter upon which Zafar and Bashir Ahmad came on the spot. They went inside the house by scaling over the wall and saw that the petitioner was trying to commit zina with his daughter who was (sic) naked. Upon seeing the complainant and the witnesses, the petitioner picked up his dress and managed to escape, hence this FIR.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant and perusing the record, it is straightaway observed that the occurrence dated 9.10.2020 was reported to the police on 18.10.2020 on the pretext that the petitioner has been requesting the complainant not to lodge the criminal case but the latter did not agree and lodge the FIR though late in time. As per the statement of victim Mst. Umm-e-Aymon recorded on 18.10.2020 when her parents had gone to Bazar she was alone at her home and when her father came back to home the door was locked from inside and when he knocked the door she raised hue and cry which attracted Zafar and Bashir Ahmad. They scaled over the wall and entered into the house and saw that the petitioner was trying to commit zina with her. However, in the statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C. recorded on 24.10.2020, she stated that on the date of occurrence the petitioner came into the house in the absence of her parents and made offer of Rs. 50/- and when she went to take the money he grabbed her, and pulled off her clothes and that he also had the gun. Thereafter, her parents came to home and the petitioner managed to escape. The improvements to the extent of Rs. 50/- by the petitioner and then coming of both parents at home and only taking off the clothes are the improvements which are significant even at the bail stage. Importantly, during the investigation the inhabitants of the locality, namely, Qari Ahmad Zia son Ahmad Din, Muhammad Saleem son of Muhammad Ramzan, Asghar Ali son of Bagh Ali, Istikhar Ahmad son of Muhammad Amin, Imdad Hussain
son of Khurshid Ahmad Qari, Muhammad Ameer son of Muhammad Shahbaz, Ejaz Ahmad son Ghulam Rasul and Muhammad Sajid son of Muhammad Rafique had categorically and separately stated that on account of dispute of Rs. 52,000/- which the petitioner owes from the complainant, a false FIR was lodged. Even otherwise, it is admitted by the complainant that the petitioner was his employee, therefore, the possibility of false implication on account of monetary dispute cannot be totally ruled out. This is the reason that the Investigating Officer prepared a discharge report on 19.01.2021 in favour of the petitioner which although was not agreed to by the learned Judicial Magistrate. Undoubtedly, no second investigation was ordered, therefore, it is the final opinion of the police. The petitioner was arrested on 19.11.2020 and has spent sufficient time behind the bars. In the facts and circumstances, the case of the petitioner calls for further inquiry into his guilt as contemplated under Section 497(2), Cr.P.C.
3. By relying upon case titled “Sharif Khan versus The State and another” reported as 2021 SCMR 87 where the Investigating Officer investigated the matter at length and found the accused innocent the bail was granted, this petition is allowed and petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
(M.A.B.) Bail granted
0 Comments